Prominence enhances voiceless-‐ness and not place dis3nc3on in English voiceless sibilants Meghan Clayards1 & Thea Knowles2
[email protected],
[email protected] 1McGill University, 2Western University ICPhS, 2015 Glasgow, UK
Background
Central quesQons
Prominence strengthens arQculaQons e.g. KeaQng, Cho, Fougeron & Tsu, 2004
Does prominence enhance acousQc contrasts directly or through lengthening? Do minimal pairs enhance acousQc contrasts directly or is it the same mechanisms as prominence? VOT is ambiguous, we use /s/ and /ʃ/
• Longer and more extreme gestures
Prominence affects acousQcs e.g. Cole et al., 2007
• Vowels are longer, higher f0, louder, more dispersed, VOTs are longer
Presence of minimal pairs affects acousQcs e.g. Baese-‐Berk & Goldrick, 2009 • VOT of voiceless stops is longer
Clear speech/mishearing affects acousQcs e.g. Maniwa, Jongman & Wade, 2009 • FricaQves are more disQnguishable
Methods Reading task “as if giving instrucQons” Target words were CVCs contain either /s/ or/ʃ/ in onset or coda, vowels /i, ɪ, æ, ɑ, ʌ/
Word Duration
Contexts Move the leash above the caterpillar Move the bukon above the caterpillar Move the bukon above the orange Move the lease above the orange
0.32 Repeat
initial S 5000
4000
initial SH ● ●
6000
YES 5000
3000
4000
●
●
●
Prominent
No pair
Repeat
Exp 1b initial
Exp 2 final
Prominent
Exp 2 initial
[h] [h]
• breathiness in preceding vowel (H1-‐H2) • duraQon of [h] secQons With prominence:
• Longer [h] not correlated with longer vowel (p = 0.78)
• Breathiness increases (p
