Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:08:14.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There Are No Back Vowels: The Larygeal Articulator Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

John H. Esling
John H. Esling*
Affiliation:
University of Victoria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As an alternative to the high-low-front-back model of vowel specification, the laryngeal articulator model is proposed, based on a reinterpretation of how the vocal tract functions to produce laryngeal and pharyngeal sounds. Evidence drawn from numerous laryngoscopic studies demonstrates the scope of articulatory behaviours possible in the pharynx. For a broad sample of languages, lingual retraction is shown to accompany laryngeal/pharyngeal gestures, motivating the redistribution of vowel quality designations. The vocal tract is divided into two articulatory components: the laryngeal articulator and the oral articulator. The vowel chart is split into three sectors: front, raised, and retracted. Whereas front vowels can be qualified as close or open, so-called back vowels are re-designated as either raised or retracted, and the role of retraction as a function of the laryngeal constrictor mechanism is elaborated.

Résumé

Résumé

Une alternative au modèle de spécification vocalique haut-bas-antérieur-postérieur est proposée, c’est-à-dire le modèle d’articulateur laryngien. Ce dernier est fondé sur une réinterprétation de comment le conduit vocal fonctionne pour produire des sons laryngiens et pharyngiens. Des données puisées de nombreuses études laryngoscopiques mettent en évidence la portée des comportements articulatoires possibles dans le pharynx. Pour un échantillon relativement large de langues, il est démontré que la rétraction linguale accompagne les gestes laryngiens/pharyngiens; ceci motive la redistribution des désignations de qualité vocalique. Le conduit vocal est divisé en deux composants articulatoires : l’articulateur laryngien et l’articulateuroral. L’espace vocalique est divisé en trois secteurs : antérieur, élevé et rétracté. Alors que les voyelles antérieures peuvent être qualifiées comme étant fermées ou ouvertes, les soi-disant voyelles postérieures sont re-désignées comme étant soit élevées ou rétractées, et le rôle de la rétraction comme une fonction du mécanisme de constriction laryngienne est élaboré.

Type
Part I: Knowledge of Language
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 50 , Issue 1-4: Language know-how: Canadian Perspectives in Contemporary Linguistics/Le savoir-faire langagier: perspectives canadiennes en linguistique contemporaine , December 2005 , pp. 13 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abercrombie, David. 1967. Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Baer, Thomas, Alfonso, Peter J., and Honda, Kiyoshi. 1988. Electromyography of the tongue muscles during vowels in /ǝpVp/ environment. Annual Bulletin of the Research Institute for Logopedics and Phoniatrics: A Festschrift for Prof. Masayuki Sawashima 22: 7–19.Google Scholar
Bell, Alexander Melville. 1867. Visible speech: The science of universal alphabetics. London: N. Trubner and Co.Google Scholar
Bettany, Lisa D. 2004. Range exploration of phonation and pitch in the first six months of life. Master’s thesis, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
Bloch, Bernard, and Trager, George L.. 1942. Outline of linguistic analysis. Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Carlson, Barry F., and Esling, John H.. 2000. Spokane. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 30: 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Barry F., and Esling, John H.. 2003. Phonetics and physiology of the historical shift of uvulars to pharyngeals in Nuuchahnulth (Nootka). Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33: 183–193. [DOI: 10.1017/S0025100303001282]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Barry F, John H. Esling, and Katie Fraser. 2001. Nuuchahnulth. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 31:275–279. [DOI: 10.1017/S0025100301002092]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Barry F., Esling, John H., and Harris, Jimmy G.. 2004. A laryngoscopic phonetic study of Nlaka’pamux (Thompson) Salish glottal stop, glottalized résonants, and pharyngeals. In Studies in Salish linguistics in honor of M. Dale Kinkade, Occasional Papers in Linguistics No. 17, ed. Gerdts, Donna B. and Matthewson, Lisa, 58–71. Mis-soula: University of Montana Press.Google Scholar
Catford, J.C. 1964. Phonation types: The classification of some laryngeal components of speech production. In In honour of Daniel Jones, ed. Abercrombie, David, Fry, D.B., MacCarthy, P.A.D., Scott, N.C., and Trim, J.L.M., 26–37. London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
Catford, J.C. 1968. The articulatory possibilities of man. In Manual of phonetics, ed. Malmberg, Bertil, 309–333. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Catford, J.C. 1977. Fundamental problems in phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Kang, Chen. 1988. The tense tones of the Yi language. Minzu Yuwen 1988(1): 18–26.Google Scholar
Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa, and Kinkade, M. Dale, eds. 1998. Salish languages and linguistics: Theoretical and descriptive perspectives. Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs 107. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Edmondson, Jerold A., Esling, John H., and Harris, Jimmy G.. Submitted. Supraglottal cavity shape, linguistic register, and other phonetic features of Somali. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics.Google Scholar
Edmondson, Jerold A., Esling, John H., Lama, Ziwo, Harris, Jimmy G., and Shaoni, Li. 2001. The aryepiglottic folds and voice quality in the Yi and Bai languages: Laryngoscopic case studies. Mon-Khmer Studies 31: 83–100.Google Scholar
Edmondson, Jerold A., and Shaoni, Li. 1994. Voice quality and voice quality change in the Bai language of Yunnan Province. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 17(2): 49–68.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 1984. Laryngographic study of phonation type and laryngeal configuration. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 14: 56–73.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 1996. Pharyngeal consonants and the aryepiglottic sphincter. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 26: 65–88.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 1999. The IPA categories ‘pharyngeal’ and ‘epiglottal’: Laryngoscopic observations of pharyngeal articulations and larynx height. Language & Speech 42: 349–372.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 2003a. Glottal and epiglottal stop in Wakashan, Salish, and Semitic. Proceedings of the 15th international congress of phonetic sciences, ed. Solé, Maria Josep, Recasens, Daniel, and Romero, Joaquín, vol. 2, 1707–1710. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 2003b. The laryngeal sphincter as an articulator: How register and phonation interact with vowel quality and tone. Western Conference on Linguistics 14: 68–86.Google Scholar
Esling, John H. 2006. States of the glottis. In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd ed., ed. Brown, Keith. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Esling, John H., Benner, Allison, Bettany, Lisa, and Zeroual, Chakir. 2004. Le contrôle articulatoire phonétique dans le prébabillage. In Actes des XXVes Journées d’Étude sur la Parole, ed. Bel, Bernard and Marlien, Isabelle, 205–208. Fez, Morocco: Association Francophone de la Communication Parlée.Google Scholar
Esling, John H., and Edmondson, Jerold A.. 2002. The laryngeal sphincter as an articulator: Tenseness, tongue root and phonation in Yi and Bai. In Phonetics and its applications: Festschrift for Jens-Peter Köster on the occasion of his 60th birthday, ed. Braun, Angelika and Masthoff, Herbert R., 38–51. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Esling, John H., Fraser, Katherine E., and Harris, Jimmy G.. 2005. Glottal stop, glottalized résonants, and pharyngeals: A reinterpretation with evidence from a laryngoscopic study of Nuuchahnulth (Nootka). Journal of Phonetics 33: 383–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esling, John H., and Harris, Jimmy G.. 2005. States of the glottis: An articulatory phonetic model based on laryngoscopic observations. In A figure of speech: A Festschrift for John Laver, ed. Hardcastle, William J. and Beck, Janet Mackenzie, 347–383. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Esling, John H., Heap, Lynn M., Snell, Roy C., and Dickson, B. Craig. 1994. Analysis of pitch dependence of pharyngeal, faucal, and larynx-height voice quality settings. In International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 94, 1475–1478. Yokohama: Acoustical Society of Japan.Google Scholar
Gauffin, Jan. 1977. Mechanisms of larynx tube constriction. Phonetica 34: 307–309.Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew. 2006. Phonetics of harmony systems. In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd ed., ed. Brown, Keith. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris, and Stevens, Kenneth N.. 1969. On the feature advanced tongue root . MIT Research Lab for Electronics Quarterly Progress Report 94: 209–215.Google Scholar
Hardcastle, William J. 1976. Physiology of speech production. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Katherine S., Vatikiotis-Bateson, Eric, and Alfonso, Peter J.. 1992. Muscle forces in vowel vocal tract formation. In International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 1992 Proceedings, ed. Ohala, John J., Nearey, Terranee, Derwing, Brace, Hodge, Megan, and Wiebe, Grace, 879–882. Edmonton: University of Alberta.Google Scholar
Honda, Kiyoshi. 1996. Organization of tongue articulation for vowels. Journal of Phonetics 24: 39–52.Google Scholar
IPA. 1949. Principles of the International Phonetic Association. London: Department of Phonetics, University College London.Google Scholar
IPA. 1999. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, Fant, Gunnar, and Halle, Morris. 1952. Preliminaries to speech analysis: The distinctive features and their correlates. Technical Report 13. Cambridge, MA: Acoustics Laboratory, MIT.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, and Halle, Morris. 1964. Tenseness and laxness. In In honour of Daniel Jones, ed. Abercrombie, David, Fry, D.B., MacCarthy, P.A.D., Scott, N.C., and Trim, J.L.M., 96–101. London: Longmans, Green and Co.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1956. An outline of English phonetics. 8th ed. Cambridge: W. Heffer and Sons.Google Scholar
Kahane, Joel C. 1986. Anatomy and physiology of the speech mechanism. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Lama, Ziwo (Fuyuan, Qiu). 1998. A phonetic and phonological overview of the Yi (Lolo) language. Master’s thesis, University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Laver, John. 1980. The phonetic description of voice quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Shaoni. 1992. On the combination of glottal squeezing and friction in the Bai language. Minzu Yuwen 1992(4): 68–72.Google Scholar
Lindau, Mona. 1978. Vowel features. Language 54: 541–563.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, Jan. 1969. Laryngeal mechanisms in speech. Quarterly Progress and Status Report, 2/3: 26–32. Stockholm: Speech Transmission Laboratory, Royal Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCune, Lorraine D., and Vihman, Marilyn M.. 2001. Early phonetic and lexical development: A productivity approach. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 44: 670–684.Google Scholar
McCune, Lorraine D., Vihman, Marilyn M., Roug-Hellichius, Liselotte, Delery, D.B., and Gogate, L.. 1996. Grunt communication in human infants (Homo Sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology 110: 27–37.Google Scholar
Murray, Robert W. 2000. Syllable cut prosody in early Middle English. Language 76: 617–654.Google Scholar
Passy, Paul, and Jones, Daniel, eds. 1926. Le maître phonétique Series 3, Year 4, Oct-Dec.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1916. Phonetic transcription of Indian languages. American Anthropological Association (Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collection, v. 66, no. 6). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Sawashima, M., and Hirose, H.. 1968. A new laryngoscopic technique by use of fiber optics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 43: 168–169.Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry. 1877. A handbook of phonetics, including a popular exposition of the principles of spelling reform. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Teshigawara, Mihoko. 2003. Voices in Japanese animation: A phonetic study of vocal stereotypes of heroes and villains in Japanese culture. Doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
Teshigawara, Mihoko, and Murano, Emi Zuiki. 2004. Articulatory correlates of voice qualities of good guys and bad guys in Japanese anime: An MRI study. Interspeech 2004–ICSLP, 1249–1252. Jeju, Korea.Google Scholar
Tiede, Mark K. 1996. An MRI-based study of pharyngeal volume contrasts in Akan and English. Journal of Phonetics 24: 399–421.Google Scholar
Trager, George L. 1972. Language and languages. San Francisco: Chandler.Google Scholar
Trager, George L., and Smith, Henry Lee. 1951. An outline of English structure. Studies in linguistics: Occasional papers, no. 3. Norman, OK: Battenberg Press.Google Scholar
Traill, Anthony. 1985. Phonetic and phonological studies of !Xóō Bushman. Quellen zur Khoisan-Forschung, 5. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Traill, Anthony. 1986. The laryngeal sphincter as a phonatory mechanism in !Xóō Bushman. In Variation, culture and evolution in African populations: Papers in honour of Dr. Hertha de Villiers, ed. Singer, Ronald and Lundy, John K., 123–131. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar
Vallancien, Bernard. 1960. Cinématique de la glotte en voix chantée. In Current problems inphoniatrics and logopedics, ed. Trojan, Felix, 13–18. Basel: Karger.Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1996. Phonological development: The origins of language in the child. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Williams, Gareth T., Farquharson, Ian M., and Anthony, James K.F.. 1975. Fibreoptic laryngoscopy in the assessment of laryngeal disorders. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 89: 299–316.Google Scholar
Wilson, Ian. To appear. The effects of post-velar consonants on vowels in Nuu-chah-nulth: Auditory, acoustic, and articulatory evidence. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 52: Southern Wakashan, ed. Davis, Henry and Wojdak, Rachel.Google Scholar
Zemlin, Willard R. 1998. Speech and hearing science: Anatomy and physiology. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Zeroual, Chakir, Esling, John H., and Crevier-Buchman, Lise. 2005. Physiological study of whispered speech in Moroccan Arabic. Interspeech 2005, 1069–1072. Lisbon.Google Scholar