OT & LabPhon

Outline Studiehandleiding –Fon 2 BA: Gilbers LabPhon: Phonetics and Phonology Example: Slippin’ & Slidin’ on the Sonority Scale Phonologically-based Account Phonetically-based Account

Studiehandleiding –code: LTX017B05 –inhoud: Fonetiek als noodzakelijk hulpmiddel bij fonologisch onderzoek. Inleiding akoestiek en spraaktechnologie; Optimality Theory en Laboratory Phonology –werkwijze: de cursus bestaat uit een reeks van hoorcolleges; aangevuld met werkcolleges

Studiehandleiding –toetsing: de beoordeling van de cursus wordt enerzijds gebaseerd op een schriftelijk tentamen aan het eind van het semester en anderzijds op de gemaakte werkcollegeopdrachten. Deelname aan het tentamen is pas mogelijk als alle opdrachten ingeleverd zijn. –doel: het verkrijgen van de vaardigheid om fonetische analyses te maken; inzicht in fonologische criteria, argumentatie.

Studiehandleiding –literatuur: papers plus naslagwerken: Rietveld, A.C.M. & V.J. van Heuven (1997) Algemene Fonetiek, Bussum Coutinho Kooij, J. & M. van Oostendorp (2003) Fonologie, uitnodiging tot de klankleer van het Nederlands, Amsterdam University Press NB literatuur pas aanschaffen na overleg met docenten

Studiehandleiding –docent: Dicky Gilbers (thuis: ) –spreekuur: via afspraak ( /postvakje) –tijd en locatie: donderdagen (hoorcolleges) A7 donderdagen (werkcolleges) –studiepunten: 5 ECTS

Studiehandleiding –college 1:Inleiding & overzicht –college 2:Optimality Theory lezen: Gilbers & de Hoop (1998) Conflicting constraints: an introduction to Optimality Theory, in: Lingua 104.1/2: 1-12 (plus eventueel: Kooij & Van Oostendorp (2003) hfst 6)

Studiehandleiding –college 3:Fonologische representaties: Syllabe/Syllabe in OT college gebaseerd op: Hayes, B. (1984) The Phonology of Rhythm in English, Linguistic Inquiry 15: Archangeli, D. (1997) Optimality Theory: An introduction to Linguistics in the 1990s, In: D. Archangeli and D. Terence Langendoen (eds) Optimality Theory, An Overview, Blackwell

Studiehandleiding –college 4:Akoestiek/Geluid Lezen lezen: Rietveld & Van Heuven (1997) hfst. 5-6 –college 5:Tools CoolEdit (12.107) lezen: Rietveld & Van Heuven (1997) hfst. 5-6 –college 6:Tools PRAAT (12.107) –colleges 7 & 8: practicum (12.107)

Studiehandleiding –college 9:LabPhon Papers: Fronting & Gliding gebaseerd op: Inkelas & Rose (to appear) Positional Neutralization: a Case from First Language Acquisition; Ninth International Phonology Meeting Structure and Melody, Vienna en Gilbers, D. (2002) Conflicting phonologically based and phonetically based constraints in the analysis of /l/-substitutions, in: M. Beers, P. Jongmans & A. Wijnands (eds) Netwerk Eerste Taalverwerving, Net- bulletin 2001, Leiden 2002: 22-40

Studiehandleiding –college 10: Fonologische representaties: Klemtoon & Ritme LabPhon Papers: Ritmische Herstructurering gebaseerd op: Schreuder & Gilbers (2004) The Influence of Speech Rate on Rhythm Patterns In: Gilbers, D., Schreuder, M. and N. Knevel (eds) On the Boundaries of Phonology and Phonetics. Groningen:

Studiehandleiding –college 11: Forensische fonetiek en Sprekerherkenning lezen: Rietveld & Van Heuven (1997) hfst Eventueel: –Optimality Theory als algemene cognitieve theorie: taal en muziek/mineur en majeur

Studiehandleiding –college 12: Q&A-college over collegestof –college 13: uitloop en vragenuur

Studiehandleiding werkcollegeopdrachten: 1Tel tot 10 in CoolEdit; verknip tot je eigen telefoonnummer 2Neem “abracadabra” op en vergelijk de duur en toonhoogte van de vierde, beklemtoonde [a] met die van de tweede, onbeklemtoonde [a]. Annoteer in Praat de soundfile: textgrid met drie tiers.

Studiehandleiding werkcollegeopdrachten: 3Noteer de eerste twee formanten van je eigen klinkers en zet de waardes uit in een Excel-plot 4Zinsmelodiemanipulatie: “Jan heeft hier niet gewerkt”. 1: Zet “hier” in focus. 2: Maak de zin vragend als “Heeft Jan hier gewerkt?”

Phonetics vs. Phonology Both the phonetician and the phonologist are interested in speech sounds

Phonetics [ala] Phoneticians study the physical properties of sound making

Phonology Phonologists are interested in the sound system of a language They want to know the function of sounds in the language (what are the phonemes?) the way sounds can be combined how the sounds are realized in different contexts

Functional Phonology Van Kees [  ] minimalization of articulatory effort (laziness of the speaker): you don’t have to make the tongue movement (at the cost of perceptual distinction) phonetically based accounts of phonological processes: LabPhon

Dutch /r/-varieties /r/ can be realized as [r] or as [  ] phonetics: two different sounds: [r] is produced as a trill of the tip of the tongue against the alveolar ridge [  ] on the other hand is produced as a trill of the uvula in the back of the mouth

Dutch /r/-varieties /r/ can be realized as [r] or as [  ] phonology: same segment; no functional (semantic) difference in the system between [  ] and [  ]. In the system /r/ is coronal, just like /t/ and /s/

Example: Schwa insertion in final consonant clusters data: harp, darm, durf, borg, hark rm/k place  place 

Example: Schwa insertion in final consonant clusters data: harp, darm, durf, borg, hark no insertion if the consonants share their place of articulation: hars, hart, mars rm/kr t place  place  place 

Example: Schwa insertion in final consonant clusters data: harp, darm, durf, borg, hark no insertion if the consonants share their place of articulation: hars, hart, mars From a phonetic point of view uvular [  ] and alveolar [t] do not share their places of articulation, from a phonological point of view they do. Yet, schwa insertion is also impossible between [  ] and [t].

Schwa insertion in final consonant clusters Conclusie: synchroon gezien is het proces alleen fonologisch adequaat te beschrijven (door te kijken naar de onderliggende vorm van de klank)

Segmental Markedness Different types of segmental markedness

The Sounds of IPA: Vowels                   FrontCentralBack  Close Close-mid Open-mid Open

Primary and Secondary Cardinal Vowels (Jones, ) Primary cardinal V’s: Secondary cardinal V’s: front back 1  8  9  15  2  7  10  14  3  6  11  13  4  5  12  Based on typology

Segmental Markedness and Correspondence /y/  [u] ; [i] ; [y] (2;1) /ky/  [ku]; [ki]; [ku]; [ki];[ky]

/y/ /i//y//u/ +syl +syl +syl +tense +tense +tense +high +high +high -low -low -low -back -back +back -round +round +round  

Minimal Distances Phonetically vs. Phonologically Phonetics: [  ] -> [  ] (both uvular) Phonology: /  / -> [k] (both velar) Steven’s Phones: Uvular [  ]  Uvular [  ]  Velar [k]k (1;11)

The Sounds of IPA: Consonants                                     glottalalveolardentalbilabiallabiodental pharyngeal velarpalatal postalveolar uvularretroflex lateral fricative approximant nasal fricative tap or flap trill plosive lateral approximant    (w) 

target: realisation: lief /lif/ ‘dear’ [  if] slapen /  / ‘to sleep’ [  ] / l/-substitutes (2;2) (2;4)

Feature Changes /l/  [w] /l/  [w]+son +cons-cons+cont +lat-lat -lab+lab +ant-ant +cor-cor -high+high -back+back -round+round Minimal Distance ?

The Naturalness of a Common Process McCarthy (1988, p.86): A common process (...) is accomplished by an elementary operation of the theory. [An uncommon process is far more complex to state]. Blumstein (1991, p.157): [L]inguistic theory makes implicit assumptions and predictions about possible relations among the sounds of a language (...). Phoneme substitutions should occur more commonly among sounds sharing a number of feature dimensions, for example, /p/- /b/ versus /t/- /w/. Moreover, sound substitutions should be characterized more commonly by single feature changes than by several feature changes.

Sonority Hierarchy Real consonants : obstruent /p,t,k../ /f,s,x../ Sonorant consonants: nasal /n,m../ liquid /l,r../ glide /j,w../ vowel /i,u../ Real vowels : /a/ Somewhere in between vowels and consonants

Sonority & Markedness Least marked: vowels and obstruents Most marked: liquids glides; liquids; nasals vowels; obstruents (1;2)

Sonority Hierarchy (cf. Jespersen, 1904) Least sonorant: obstruents /p,t,k../ /f,s,x../ nasals /n,m../ liquids /l,r../ glides /j,w../ vowels /i,u../ /e,o../ Most sonorant: /a/

Satellite Positions syllabe onsetrhyme marginnucleus m.core satellitepeak satellite coda s l a

Phonological Analysis Gliding process: /l/  [  ] D. Gilbers (1992), Phonological Networks, a theory of segment representation, PhD Thesis, Groningen University: Minimal Change in the phonological Control component … leads to a series of articulatory feature changes in the Phonetic Component (Domino- effect)

Psycholinguistic Evidence R. Bastiaanse, D. Gilbers, K vd Linde (1994): Sonority Substitutions in Broca’s and Conduction Aphasia, in: Journal of Neurolinguistics, vol.8.4, p Broca’s (phonetically-based disorders) vs. Conduction Aphasics (phonologically-based disorders) Gliding explained as a phonological process

Acoustic Evidence D. Gilbers (2002), Conflicting phonologically based and phonetically based constraints in the analysis of /l/-substitutions, in M.Beers, P.Jongmans & A. Wijnands (eds) Netwerk eerste Taalverwerving, Net-bulletin 2001, Leiden 2002, p Gliding explained as a phonetic process

Liquids and Glides Perceptively (Ainsworth and Paliwal, 1984) typical set of responses obtained from listening to glide/liquid-vowel synthetic stimuli (simplified) 3160 Hzw w w l l l l j j j  w w w l l l l j j j F3 loc. freq.w w w r r r l j j j  w w w r r r j j j j 1540 Hzw w r r r r r j j j 760 Hz  F2 locus freq.  2380 Hz

Phonology vs. Phonetics Thesis: An adequate account of phonological data is only possible if phonologically based and phonetically based influences interact OT seems to be the perfect tool to bridge the gap between phonological and phonetic accounts