Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityEvaluating the theoryThe account summarized above was developedin various reports from the late sixties and earlyseventies. In the tutorial chapter by Hirose(1997) cited in the introduction, supraglottalconstrictions are but briefly mentioned in connectionwith whispering, glottal stop and theproduction of the Danish stød. In Honda (1995)it is not mentioned at all.In 2001 Ladefoged contributed to an updateon the world’s phonation types (Gordon & Ladefoged2001) without considering the factsand interpretations presented by JG. In fact theauthors’ conclusion is compatible with Ladefoged’searlier one-dimensional proposal from1967: “Phonation differences can be classifiedalong a continuum ranging from voiceless,through breathy voiced, to regular, modal voicing,and then on through creaky voice to glottalclosure……”.JG did not continue to pursue his researchon laryngeal mechanisms. He got involved inother projects without ever publishing enoughin refereed journals to make his theory morewidely known in the speech community. Thereis clearly an important moral here for both seniorand junior members of our field.The question also arises: Was JG simplywrong? No, recent findings indicate that hiswork is still relevant and in no way obsolete.Figure 4. Effect of stød on F0 contour. Minimalpair of Danish words. Adapted from Fischer-Jørgensen’s (1989). Speaker JROne of the predictions of the theory is that theoccurrence of creaky voice ought to be associatedwith a low F0. Monsen and Engebretson(1977) asked five male and five female adultsto produce an elongated schwa vowel usingnormal, soft, loud, falsetto and creaky voice. Aspredicted every subject showed a consistentlylower F0 for the creaky voice (75 Hz for male,100 Hz for female subjects).Another expectation is that the Danish stødshould induce a rapid lowering of the F0 contour.Figure 4 taken from Fischer-Jørgensen’s(1989) article illustrates a minmal pair that conformsto that prediction.The best way of assessing the merit of JG’swork is to compare it with at the phonetic researchdone during the last decade by John Eslingwith colleagues and students at the Universityof Victoria in Canada. Their experimentalobservations will undoubtedly change and expandour understanding of the role played bythe pharynx and the larynx in speech. Evidentlythe physiological systems for protective closure,swallowing and respiration are re-used in articulationand phonation to an extent that is notyet acknowledged in current standard phoneticframeworks ((Esling 1996, 2005, Esling & Harris2005, Moisik 2008, Moisik & Esling 2007,Edmondson & Esling 2006)). For further refssee http://www.uvic.ca/ling/research/phonetics .In a recent thesis by Moisik (2008), an analysiswas performed of anatomical landmarks inlaryngoscopic images. To obtain a measure ofthe activity of the aryepiglottic sphincter mechanismMoisik used an area bounded by thearyepiglottic folds and epiglottic tubercle (redregion (solid outline) top of Figure 5). Hisquestion was: How does it vary across variousphonatory conditions? The two diagrams in thelower half of the figure provide the answer.Along the ordinate scales: the size of theobserved area (in percent relative to maximumvalue). The phonation types and articulationsalong the x-axes have been grouped into twosets: Left: conditions producing large areas thusindicating little or no activity in the aryepiglotticsphincter; Right: a set with small area valuesindicating strong degrees of aryepiglottic constriction.JG’s observations appear to matchthese results closely.ConclusionsJG hypothesized that “laryngealization in combinationwith low vocalis activity is used as amechanism for producing a low pitch voice”and that the proposed relationships between“low tone, laryngealization and glottal stopmay give a better understanding of dialectalvariations and historical changes in languagesusing low tone”.10
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityCurrent evidence lends strong support to hisview of how the larynx works in speech. Hisobservations and analyses still appear worthy ofbeing further explored and tested. In particularwith regard to F0 control. JG would have enjoyedRiad (2009).Figure 5. Top: Anatomical landmarks in laryngoscopicimage. Note area bounded by the aryepiglotticfolds and epiglottic tubercle (red region (solidoutline). Bottom part: Scales along y-axes: Size ofthe observed area (in percent relative to maximumvalue). Left: conditions with large areas indicatinglittle activity in the aryepiglottic sphincter; Right:Small area values indicating stronger of aryepiglotticconstriction. Data source: Moisik (2008).AcknowledgementsI am greatly indebted to John Esling and ScottMoisik of the University of Victoria for permissionto use their work.ReferencesEsling J H (1996): “Pharyngeal consonants andthe aryepiglottic sphincter”, Journal of theInternational Phonetic Association 26:65-88.Esling J H (2005): “There are no back vowels:the laryngeal articulator model”, CanadianJournal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne delinguistique 50(1/2/3/4): 13–44Esling J H & Harris J H (2005): “States of theglottis: An articulatory phonetic modelbased on laryngoscopic observations”, 345-383 in Hardcastle W J & Mackenzie Beck J(eds): A Figure of Speech: A Festschrift forJohn Laver, LEA:New Jersey.Edmondson J A & Esling J H (2006): “Thevalves of the throat and their functioning intone, vocal register and stress: laryngoscopiccase studies”, Phonology 23, 157–191Fischer-Jørgensen E (1989): “Phonetic analysisof the stød in Standard Danish”, Phonetica46: 1–59.Gordon M & Ladefoged P (2001): “Phonationtypes: a cross-linguistic overview”, J Phonetics29:383-406.Ladefoged P (1967): Preliminaries to linguisticphonetics, University of Chicago Press:Chicago.Lindqvist-Gauffin J (1969): "Laryngeal mechanismsin speech", STL-QPSR 2-3 26-31.Lindqvist-Gauffin J (1972): “A descriptivemodel of laryngeal articulation in speech”,STL-QPSR 13(2-3) 1-9.Moisik S R (2008): A three-dimensional Modelof the larynx and the laryngeal constrictormechanism:, M.A thesis, University of Victoria,Canada.Moisik S R & Esling J H (2007): "3-D auditory-articulatorymodeling of the laryngealconstrictor mechanism", in J. Trouvain &W.J. Barry (eds): Proceedings of the 16thInternational Congress of PhoneticSciences, vol. 1 (pp. 373-376), Saarbrücken:Universität des Saarlandes.Monsen R B & Engebretson A M (1977):“Study of variations in the male and femaleglottal wave”, J Acoust Soc Am vol 62(4),981-993.Negus V E (1949): The Comparative Anatomyand Physiology of the Larynx, Hafner:NY.Negus V E (1957): ”The mechanism of the larynx”,Laryngoscope, vol LXVII No 10,961-986.Pressman J J (1954): ” Sphincters of the larynx”,AMA Arch Otolaryngol 59(2):221-36.Riad T (2009): “Eskilstuna as the tonal key toDanish”, Proceedings FONETIK 2009,Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University11
Page 1 and 2: Department of LinguisticsProceeding
Page 3 and 4: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 9: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 41 and 42: Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 61 and 62:
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227:
Department of LinguisticsPhonetics
show all

Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?