Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University[iœː] or [iʉː] (for examples see E. Lagman,1979: 53). Considering this variation, it isnearly impossible to predict how /yː/ might berealised in our ES data. Based on E. Lagman’scomment (1979: 5) about ES being most similarto the Nyland variety of FS, we can hypothesisethat ES vowels would be realisedcloser to those of FS than CS. Yet, we wouldnot expect exactly the same distribution ofclose vowels in ES as in FS or CS.Materials and methodSpeech dataAs materials the word list from the SweDia2000 database was used. The data comprisedthree repetitions of four words containing longclose vowels: dis (mist), typ (type), lus (louse),sot (soot). When recording the ES speakers, theword list had to be adapted slightly because notall the words in the list appear in ES vocabulary.Therefore, dis was replaced by ris (rice),typ by nyp (pinch) and sot by mot (against).Four elderly ES speakers (2 women and 2men) were recorded in a quiet setting in Stockholmin March 2009. All the speakers had arrivedin Sweden in the mid 1940s as youngstersand were between 80 and 86 years old (meanage 83) at the time of recording. They representthe largest dialect area of ES, the Rickul variety,having all been born there (also all theirparents came from Rickul). The ES speakerswere recorded using the same equipment as forcollecting the SweDia 2000 database: a Sonyportable DAT recorder TCD-D8 and Sony tiepintype condenser microphones ECM-T140.For the comparison with CS and FS theword list data from the SweDia 2000 databasefrom two locations was used: Borgå in Nylandwas selected to represent FS, while CS was representedby Kårsta near Stockholm. From eachof these locations the recordings from 3 olderwomen and 3 older men were analysed. TheBorgå speakers were between 53 and 82 yearsold (mean age 73), and the Kårsta speakers between64 and 74 years old (mean age 67).AnalysisThe ES data was manually labelled and segmented,and the individual repetitions of thewords containing long close vowels were extractedand saved as separate sound and annotationfiles. Equivalent CS and FS data was extractedfrom the SweDia database using a Praatscript. The segmentation was manually checkedand corrected.A Praat script was used for obtaining thevalues for the first three formant frequencies(F1, F2, F3) of each vowel with the Burgmethod. The measurements were taken at themid-point of each vowel. All formant valueswere subsequently checked and implausible ordeviant frequencies re-measured and correctedby hand. Mean values were calculated for thefemale and male speakers for each variety.One-Bark vowel circles were plotted for thefemale and male target vowels [iː, yː, ʉː, uː] ofeach variety on separate F1/F2 and F2/F3 plotsusing another Praat script.In order to test for statistically significantdifferences between the dialects a two-wayANOVA was carried out with the betweensubjectsfactors dialect (3) and gender (2), anda dependent variable formant (3).Finally, a comparison of the inventory oflong close vowels in the three varieties wasconducted using the Euclidean distance, whichwas calculated for the first three formants basedon values in Bark.ResultsFigure 2 plots the F1 and F2 values separatelyfor female and male speakers for each of thethree dialects. It can be seen that the distributionis roughly similar for both female and malespeakers in all varieties.There is a significant effect of dialect on F2for the vowel /iː/ (F(2, 10) = 8.317, p
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityFigure 2. F1/F2 plots of long close vowels for female and male speakers of Estonian Swedish, FinlandSwedish and Central Swedish.Figure 3. F2/F3 plots of long close vowels for female and male speakers of Estonian Swedish, FinlandSwedish and Central Swedish.57
Page 1 and 2:
Department of LinguisticsProceeding
Page 3 and 4:
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 5 and 6: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 41 and 42: Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 55: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?