1987The Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaRequires access

Coarticulation in VCV sequences in Arabic

Lutfi Hussein

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

Vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in VCV utterances has been the subject of several studies. Ohman [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] found that vowels in VCV utterances in English and Swedish have some transconsonantal effect on one another. He also found some evidence suggesting that secondary articulation features, like palatalization in Russian, block coarticulation. Action theorists, such as Fowler [J. Exp. Phon. Gen. 112, 386–412 (1983)], explain V-to-V coarticulation in terms of timing; that is, they claim that vowels in speech production are underlyingly overlapping and consonants ride on top of the vowels. This suggestion implies that intervocalic consonants, whether they have secondary features or not, do not block coarticulation. Keating [UCLA WPP 62, 1–13 (1985)], on the other hand, explains it in terms of autosegmental phonology. She places the features for vowels and consonants on two separate tiers, and leaves consonants unspecified for vowel features, so that V-to-V coarticulation affects an interpolation between vowel targets. Keating's model implies that consonants that have secondary articulation (i.e., vowel features) must block coarticulation. A preliminary analysis of VCV utterances in Arabic shows that pharyngealized consonants indeed tend to block coarticulation, a finding which supports Keating's prediction over Fowler's.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in VCV utterances has been the subject of several studies. Ohman [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] found that vowels in VCV utterances in English and Swedish have some transconsonantal effect on one another. He also found some evidence suggesting that secondary articulation features, like palatalization in Russian, block coarticulation. Action theorists, such as Fowler [J. Exp. Phon. Gen. 112, 386–412 (1983)], explain V-to-V coarticulation in terms of timing; that is, they claim that vowels in speech production are underlyingly overlapping and consonants ride on top of the vowels. This suggestion implies that intervocalic consonants, whether they have secondary features or not, do not block coarticulation. Keating [UCLA WPP 62, 1–13 (1985)], on the other hand, explains it in terms of autosegmental phonology. She places the features for vowels and consonants on two separate tiers, and leaves consonants unspecified for vowel features, so that V-to-V coarticulation affects an interpolation between vowel targets. Keating's model implies that consonants that have secondary articulation (i.e., vowel features) must block coarticulation. A preliminary analysis of VCV utterances in Arabic shows that pharyngealized consonants indeed tend to block coarticulation, a finding which supports Keating's prediction over Fowler's.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in VCV utterances has been the subject of several studies. Ohman [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 39, 151–168 (1966)] found that vowels in VCV utterances in English and Swedish have some transconsonantal effect on one another. He also found some evidence suggesting that secondary articulation features, like palatalization in Russian, block coarticulation. Action theorists, such as Fowler [J. Exp. Phon. Gen. 112, 386–412 (1983)], explain V-to-V coarticulation in terms of timing; that is, they claim that vowels in speech production are underlyingly overlapping and consonants ride on top of the vowels. This suggestion implies that intervocalic consonants, whether they have secondary features or not, do not block coarticulation. Keating [UCLA WPP 62, 1–13 (1985)], on the other hand, explains it in terms of autosegmental phonology. She places the features for vowels and consonants on two separate tiers, and leaves consonants unspecified for vowel features, so that V-to-V coarticulation affects an interpolation between vowel targets. Keating's model implies that consonants that have secondary articulation (i.e., vowel features) must block coarticulation. A preliminary analysis of VCV utterances in Arabic shows that pharyngealized consonants indeed tend to block coarticulation, a finding which supports Keating's prediction over Fowler's.

Key concepts: Coarticulation, Vowel, Articulation (sociology), Place of articulation, Mathematics, Linguistics, Speech recognition, Manner of articulation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Coarticulation in VCV sequences in Arabic — Research Paper | ScholarLens