Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:52:56.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonetic and phonological patterns of nasality in Lakota vowels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2015

Rebecca Scarborough ,
Georgia Zellou ,
Armik Mirzayan  and
David S. Rood
Rebecca Scarborough
Affiliation:
University of Colorado at Boulder [email protected]
Georgia Zellou
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis [email protected]
Armik Mirzayan
Affiliation:
University of South Dakota [email protected]
David S. Rood
Affiliation:
University of Colorado at Boulder [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Lakota (Siouan) has both contrastive and coarticulatory vowel nasality, and both nasal and oral vowels can occur before or after a nasal consonant. This study examines the timing and degree patterns of acoustic vowel nasality across contrastive and coarticulatory contexts in Lakota, based on data from six Lakota native speakers. There is clear evidence of both anticipatory and carryover nasal coarticulation across oral and nasal vowels, with a greater degree of carryover than anticipatory nasalization. Nasality in carryover contexts is nonetheless restricted: the oral–nasal contrast is neutralized for high back vowels in this context and realized for three of the six speakers in low vowels. In the absence of nasal consonant context, contrastive vowel nasalization is generally greatest late in the vowel. Low nasal vowels in carryover contexts parallel this pattern (despite the location of the nasal consonant before the vowel), and low nasal vowels in anticipatory contexts are most nasal at the start of the vowel. We relate the synchronic patterns of coarticulation in Lakota to both its system of contrast and diachronic processes in the evolution of nasality in Lakota. These data reflect that coarticulatory patterns, as well as contrastive patterns, are grammatical and controlled by speakers.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , December 2015 , pp. 289 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © International Phonetic Association 2015 

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

Ali, Latif, Gallagher, Tanya, Goldstein, Jeffrey & Daniloff, Raymond. 1971. Perception of coarticulated nasality. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 49 (2), 538–540.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald. 2011. LanguageR: Data sets and functions with ‘Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics’. R package version 1.4.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Maechle, Martin, Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steven. 2013. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.0-4.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter, Harnsberger, James D. & Lindemann, Stephanie. 2002. Language-specific patterns of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: Acoustic structures and their perceptual correlates. Journal of Phonetics 30, 591–627.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter & Krakow, Rena Arens. 1999. Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: Evidence for partial compensation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106 (5), 2868–2887.Google Scholar
Benguerel, A-P. & Helen A. Cowan. 1974. Coarticulation of upper lip protrusion in French. Phonetica 30, 41–55.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz & Deloria, Ella Cara. 1941. Dakota grammar (Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences 23).Google Scholar
Carignan, Christopher. 2014. An acoustic and articulatory examination of the ‘oral’ in ‘nasal’: The oral articulations of French nasal vowels are not arbitrary. Journal of Phonetics 46, 23–33.Google Scholar
Chen, Marilyn Y. 1997. Acoustic correlates of English and French nasalized vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102 (4), 2360–2370.Google Scholar
Chen, Matthew [Y]. 1972. Nasals and nasalization in Chinese: Explorations in phonological universals. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Chen, Matthew Y. & Wang, William S-Y. 1975. Sound change: Actuation and implementation. Language 51, 255–281.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail C. 1990. Phonetic and phonological rules of nasalization. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Delvaux, Véronique, Metens, Thierry & Soquet, Alain. 2002. French nasal vowels: Acoustic and articulatory properties. 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP2002), Denver, CO, 53–56.Google Scholar
Delvaux, Véronique, Demolin, Didier, Harmegnies, Bernard & Soquet, Alain. 2008. The aerodynamics of nasalization in French. Journal of Phonetics 36 (4), 578–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farnetani, Edda. 1990. V–C–V lingual coarticulation and its spatio-temporal domain. In Hardcastle, William J. & Marchal, Alain (eds.), Speech production and speech modeling, 93–110. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flemming, Edward. 2011. La grammaire de la coarticulation. In Embarki, Mohamed & Dodane, Christelle (eds.), La coarticulation: Indices, direction et representation, 189–212. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Hajek, John. 1997. Universals of sound change in nasalization. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hajek, John & Maeda, Shinji. 2000. Vowel height and duration on the development of distinctive nasalization. In Broe, Michael B. & Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the lexicon, 52–69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hattori, Shiro, Yamamoto, Kengo & Fujimura, Osamu. 1958. Nasalization of vowels in relation to nasals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 30 (4), 235–267.Google Scholar
House, Arthur S. & Stevens, Kenneth N.. 1956. Analog studies of the nasalization of vowels. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 21, 218–222.Google Scholar
Huffman, Marie K. 1988. Timing of contextual nasalization in two languages. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics 69, 68–76.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A. 1985. Universal phonetics and the organization of grammars. In Fromkin, Victoria A. (ed.), Phonetic linguistics, 115–132. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A. & Cohn, Abigail C.. 1988. Cross-language effects of vowels on consonant onsets. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84, S1, S84.Google Scholar
Krakow, Rena A. 1999. Physiological organization of syllables: A review. Journal of Phonetics 27, 23–54.Google Scholar
Lahiri, Aditi & Marslen-Wilson, William. 1991. The mental representation of lexical form: A phonological approach to the recognition lexicon. Cognition 38 (3), 245–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F. & Fennig, Charles D.. 2014. Ethnologue: Languages of the world, 17th edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International. http://www.ethnologue.com.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2013. Absence of common consonants. In Dryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/18 (accessed 16 April 2014).Google Scholar
Maeda, Shinji. 1993. Acoustics of vowel nasalization and articulatory shifts in French nasal vowels. Phonetics and Phonology 5, 147–167.Google Scholar
Manuel, Sharon Y. 1990. The role of contrast in limiting vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in different languages. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 88 (3), 1286–1298.Google Scholar
Manuel, Sharon Y. 1999. Cross-language studies: Relating language-particular coarticulation patterns to other language-particular facts. In Hardcastle, William J. & Hewlett, Nigel (eds.), Coarticulation: Theory, data and techniques, 179–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manuel, Sharon Y. & Krakow, Rena A.. 1984. Universal and language-particular aspects of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation. Haskins Laboratory Status Report on Speech Research SR77/78, 69–78.Google Scholar
Michaud, Alexis, Jacques, Guillaume & Rankin, Robert L.. 2012. Historical transfer of nasality between consonantal onset and vowel: From C to V or from V to C? Diachronica 29 (2), 201–230.Google Scholar
Mok, Peggy PK. 2013. Does vowel inventory density affect vowel-to-vowel coarticulation? Language and Speech 56 (2), 191–209.Google Scholar
Moll, Kenneth L. & Daniloff, Raymond G.. 1971. Investigation of the timing of velar movements during speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 50 (2B), 678–684.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1975. Phonetic explanations for nasal sound patterns. In Ferguson, Charles A., Hyman, Larry M. & Ohala, John J. (eds.), Nasalfest: Papers from a Symposium on Nasals and Nasalization, 289–316. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Language Universals Project.Google Scholar
Öhman, Sven E. G. 1966. Coarticulation in VCV utterances: Spectrographic measurements. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 39 (1), 151–168.Google Scholar
Pope, Mildred Katharine. 1952. From Latin to Modern French with especial consideration of Anglo-Norman. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.Google Scholar
Rood, David S. & Taylor, Allan R.. 1996. Sketch of Lakhota, a Siouan language. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 17: Languages, 440–482. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Scarborough, Rebecca & Zellou, Georgia. 2013. Clarity in communication: “Clear” speech authenticity and lexical neighborhood density effects in speech production and perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 134 (5), 3793–3807.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solé, Maria-Josep. 1995. Spatio-temporal patterns of velopharyngeal action in phonetic and phonological nasalization. Language and Speech 38 (1), 1–23.Google Scholar
Straka, Georges. 1955. Remarques sur les voyelles nasales, leur origine et leur évolution en français. Revue de linguistique romane 19, 245–274.Google Scholar
Ullrich, Jan. 2011. New Lakota dictionary, 2nd edn. Bloomington, IN: Lakota Language Consortium.Google Scholar
van Reenen, Pieter. 1982. Phonetic feature definitions: Their integration into phonology and their relation to speech, a case study of the feature NASAL. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Whalen, Douglas H. 1990. Coarticulation is largely planned. Journal of Phonetics 18, 3–35.Google Scholar
White Hat, Albert Sr. 1999. Reading and writing the Lakota language: La ota iyapi u wapi naha yawapi, edited by Jael Kampfe. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar