Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T14:35:31.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effects of Post-Velar Consonants on Vowels in Nuu-chah-nulth: Auditory, Acoustic, and Articulatory Evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Ian Wilson
Ian Wilson*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia/University of Aizu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous phonetic documentation of Nuu-chah-nulth consonant-vowel interactions has either solely relied on transcriptions or has been incomplete in some other respect. Using auditory, acoustic, and articulatory evidence, this article documents the effects of all post-velar consonants on all vowels. Results show that /i/ and /i:/ almost always have a schwa offglide before the uvular and pharyngeal stops, but not always before the fricatives. When these vowels follow uvulars and pharyngeals (with the exception of the labialized uvular), they are usually lowered and do not have a schwa offglide. Ultrasound data confirm that the tongue root is active in articulating uvular and pharyngeal consonants and that the schwa off-glide occurs because the tongue is moving through a schwa-like configuration on its way from the high front vowel to the retracted consonant. The vowels /u/ and /u:/ are lowered and/or diphthongized following (but not preceding) pharyngeals, and they are unaffected by uvulars.

Résumé

Résumé

Les études phonétiques antérieures sur l’interaction des consonnes et des voyelles en nuu-chah-nulth se sont basées exclusivement sur des transcriptions ou ont été incomplètes à d’autres égards. En utilisant des données auditives, acoustiques et articulatoires, cet article documente les effets de toutes les consonnes post-vélaires sur toutes les voyelles. Les données démontrent que /i/ et /i:/ sont presque toujours relâchés vers un schwa devant les occlusives uvulaires et pharyngiennes, mais que ce relâchement n’est pas toujours présent devant les fricatives. Lorsque ces voyelles apparaissent après les uvulaires et les pharyngiennes (exception étant faite de l’uvulaire labialisée), elles sont généralement abaissées et non pas relâchées vers un schwa. Les données ultrasonores confirment que la racine de la langue est active dans l’articulation des consonnes uvulaires et pharyngiennes et que le relâchement vers le schwa est dû au déplacement de la voyelle haute avancée vers la consonne rétractée, occupant au passage une configuration qui ressemble à celle du schwa. Les voyelles /u/ et /u:/ sont abaissées et/ou diphtonguées suivant (mais non pas précédant) les pharyngiennes et elles ne sont pas altérées par les uvulaires.

Type
Part II: Phonetic and Phonological Properties
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 52 , Issue 1-2: Southern Wakashan Languages , July 2007 , pp. 43 - 70
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2007

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

Al-Ani, Salman H. 1970. Arabic phonology: An acoustical and physiological investigation (Janua Linguarum 61). The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Alwan, Abeer. 1986. Acoustic and perceptual correlates of pharyngeal and uvular consonants. SM dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Lilias E. 1964. The phonetic structure of Somali. Ridgewood, NJ: Gregg Press. [1934.]Google Scholar
Bessell, Nicola J. 1992. Towards a phonetic and phonological typology of post-velar articulation. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Bessell, Nicola J. 1998a. Phonetic aspects of retraction in Interior Salish. In Salish languages and linguistics: Theoretical and descriptive perspectives, ed. Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa and Kinkade, M. Dale, 125–152. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bessell, Nicola J. 1998b. Local and non-local consonant-vowel interaction in Interior Salish. Phonology 15:1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, Susan J. 2000. On the distribution and representation of schwa in Sliammon (Salish): Descriptive and theoretical perspectives. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Bliese, Loren F. 1981. A generative grammar of Afar. Arlington, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Butcher, Andrew, and Ahmad, Kusay. 1987. Some acoustic and aerodynamic characteristics of pharyngeal consonants in Iraqi Arabic. Phonetica 44:156–172.Google Scholar
Carlson, Barry F., and Esling, John H.. 2003. Phonetics and physiology of the historical shift of uvulars to pharyngeals in Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka). Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33:183–193.Google Scholar
Carlson, Barry F., Esling, John H., and Fraser, Katie. 2001. Nuu-chah-nulth. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 31:275–279.Google Scholar
Catford, John C. 1977. Fundamental problems in phonetics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Eung-Do. 1983. Chilcotin flattening. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 28:123–132.Google Scholar
Cook, Eung-Do. 1993. Chilcotin flattening and autosegmental phonology. Lingua 91:149–174.Google Scholar
Czaykowska-Higgins, Ewa. 1987. Characterizing tongue root behavior. Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Davis, Stuart. 1995. Emphasis spread in Arabic and grounded phonology. Linguistic Inquiry 26:465–498.Google Scholar
Elgendy, Ahmed M. 2001. Aspects ofpharyngeal coarticulation. Amsterdam: Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Elorrieta, Jabier. 1991. The feature specification of uvulars. In WCCFL 10: The Proceedings of the Tenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Bates, Dawn, 139–149. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Esling, John H., Carlson, Barry F., and Harris, Jimmy G.. 2002. A laryngoscopic phonetic study of Nootka and Salish glottal stop, glottalized resonants, and pharyngeals. Paper read at the annual meeting of The Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas (SSILA), San Francisco.Google 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
Gick, Bryan. 2002. The use of ultrasound for linguistic phonetic fieldwork. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 32:113–121.Google Scholar
Gick, Bryan, Michelson, Karin, and Radanov, Bosko. 2006. Articulation without acoustics: A case study of Oneida utterance-final forms. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120:3377.Google Scholar
Gick, Bryan, and Wilson, Ian. 2001. Pre-liquid excrescent schwa: What happens when vocalic targets conflict. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (Eurospeech), ed. Dalsgaard, P., Lindberg, B., and Benner, H., 273–276. Aalborg, Denmark: Center for PersonKommunikation.Google Scholar
Gick, Bryan, and Wilson, Ian. 2006. Excrescent schwa and vowel laxing: Cross-linguistic responses to conflicting articulatory targets. In Laboratory Phonology 8, ed. Goldstein, Louis, Whalen, Douglas H., and Best, Catherine T., 635–659. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Goad, Heather. 1991. [Atr] and [Rtr] are different features. In WCCFL 10: The Proceedings of the Tenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Bates, Dawn, 163–173. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1995. Feature geometry and feature spreading. Linguistic Inquiry 26:1–46.Google Scholar
Hayward, K.M., and Hayward, R.J.. 1989. ‘Guttural’: Arguments for a new distinctive feature. Transactions of the Philological Society 87:179–193.Google Scholar
Howe, Darin M. 2000. Oowekyala segmental phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William H. Jr., 1969. Origin of the Nootka pharyngeals. International Journal of American Linguistics 35:125–153.Google Scholar
Kier, William M., and Smith, Kathleen K.. 1985. Tongues, tentacles and trunks: The biome-chanics of movement in muscular-hydrostats. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 83:307–324.Google Scholar
Kim, Eun-Sook. 2000. Glottalization in Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka): A module interaction case. University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics 3:107–117.Google Scholar
Kim, Eun-Sook. 2003. Theoretical issues in Nuu-chah-nulth phonology and morphology. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Kingston, John, and Diehl, Randy L.. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70:419–454.Google Scholar
Lewis, Geoffrey. 2001. Turkish grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1984. Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1991. Semitic gutturals and distinctive feature theory. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics III, ed. Comrie, Bernard and Eid, Mushira, 63–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. 1994. The phonetics and phonology of Semitic pharyngeals. In Phonological structure and phonetic form: Papers in laboratory phonology III, ed. Keating, Patricia, 191–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, Ramona E. 2004. Retraction in Montana Salish lateral consonants: An ultrasonic study. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Namdaran, Nahal. 2006. Retraction in Sὗáὗimcets: An ultrasonic investigation. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Pickett, James M. 1999. The acoustics of speech communication. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Recasens, Daniel. 1999. Lingual coarticulation. In Coarticulation: Theory, data and techniques, ed. Hardcastle, William J. and Hewlett, Nigel, 80–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Recasens, Daniel, and Espinosa, Aina. 2006. Articulatory, positional and contextual characteristics of palatal consonants: Evidence from Majorcan Catalan. Journal of Phonetics 34:295–318.Google Scholar
Remnant, Daphne E. 1990. Tongue root articulations: A case study of Lillooet. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Rose, Sharon. 1996. Variable laryngeals and vowel lowering. Phonology 13:73–117.Google Scholar
Rose, Suzanne M. 1981. Kyuquot grammar. Doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. N.d. Fieldnotes on Nootka. Ms., Philadelphia, PA. In Boas Collection of the American Philosophical Society [W2a.l8].Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward, and Swadesh, Morris. 1939. Nootka texts: Tales and ethnological narratives with grammatical notes and lexical materials. Philadelphia: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Shahin, Kimary N. 2002. Postvelar harmony. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shank, Scott, and Wilson, Ian. 2000a. Acoustic evidence for ʕ as a glottalized pharyngeal glide in Nuu-chah-nulth. University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics 3:185–197.Google Scholar
Shank, Scott, and Wilson, Ian. 2000b. An acoustic analysis of vowel formants in pharyngeal and glottal contexts in Nuu-chah-nulth. University of Washington Working Papers in Linguistics 19:75–84.Google Scholar
Stonham, John. 1999. Aspects of Tsishaath Nootka phonetics and phonology. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
van Eijk, Jan. 1997. The Lillooet language. Vancouver: UBC Press. [1985.]Google Scholar
Waldie, Ryan. 2003. Nuu-chah-nulth stress. Paper read at the 19th Northwest Linguistics Conference (NWLC 19), Victoria, BC.Google Scholar
Wilson, Ian. 2000. Acoustic evidence of a phonetics-phonology mismatch in Nuu-chah-nulth. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 108:2506.Google Scholar
Zawaydeh, Bushra A. 1998. Gradient uvularization spread in Ammani-Jordanian Arabic. In Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XI, ed. Benmamoun, Elabbas, Eid, Mushira, and Haeri, Niloofar, 117–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar