Science and Technology news... :: View topic - Redefining [a] and [æ]? or using a better vowel qua drilater

ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com · Guest

On Jul 28, 11:39 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
[quote]In article
514d6874-ac20-4a93-a502-5905e781b...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,

"ranjit_math...@yahoo.com" <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jul 28, 2:14 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my vowels are
pretty close to what is considered general American). My
pronunciation of "putt" has an F1 of about 650 Hz; for "pot", my F1 is
about 760 Hz.

On the formant charts of many Continental European languages, 650Hz is
open enough to be pegged as the (Kirshenbaum/ Carresquer) [a"] rather
than as [@]

What matters are the relative values, not the absolute values. An F1
of 650 in isolation doesn>t tell you much.
[/quote]
760 vs. 650 gives me an idea. Would there be anything seriously
incorrect (in subphonemic transcription) about averaging the American
realizations of /A./ to a neutrally rounded (i.e., neither spread nor
rounded) open central vowel rather than a rounded back vowel,
representing the American realization of /V/ as a neutrally rounded
mid-open central vowel* and representing an American schwa as mid-
closed neutrally rounded vowel?
* open = same height as [a], mid-open = same height as [E], mid-closed
= same height as [e]

ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com · Guest

On Jul 28, 9:46 am, "John Atkinson" <johna...@bigpond.com> wrote:
[quote]ranjit_math...@yahoo.com wrote:

I have 4 central vowels in my Malayalam; 3 of them phonemically
distinct:
1) barred i like in an American>s "Memphis".
2) [e"] like the last vowel in an American>s "buses".
3) [@] like in French "le"
4) [V] like the first vowel in an American>s "buses".

/a/, which might be your "3) and 4)".
[/quote]
Yes, except that my dialect>s /a/ has yet another allophone [E_].

John Atkinson · Guest

ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 28, 2:14 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
ranjit:

The same vowel at the beginning and end of America makes me uneasy;
the former seems a little more closed than central and the latter a
little more open. But then, this might be because the two qualities
are orthographically (and possibly phonemically) distinct in
Malayalam.

Raising of schwa is a well-studied phenomena (generally speaking,
word-final schwa raises). In a narrow transcription, this raising
could be transcribed if desired (usually with [<barred-i>]). In a
broad transcription that ignores schwa-raising, [<schwa>] can be used
for both vowels.

I have 4 central vowels in my Malayalam; 3 of them phonemically
distinct:
1) barred i like in an American>s "Memphis".
2) [e"] like the last vowel in an American>s "buses".
3) [@] like in French "le"
4) [V] like the first vowek in an American>s "buses".

#3 is used only terminally and is (phonemically and?) orthographically
(in the Malayalam script) indistinct from #4. A noun ending in [V]
changes its ending to [@] when used as an adjective.
[/quote]
Interesting. In the Malayalam analysed by Asher and Kumari (1997), as
quoted by Krishnamurti in the Cambridge green book, the vowel phonemes
are /i i: e e: a a: o o: u u: /, and, marginally, /æ /. All are either
front or back except /a a: /, which AFAICT are central, and none seem to
correspond with any in your list except (perhaps) /a/, which might be
your "3) and 4)".

The script, of course, distinguishes the vowels <i i: e e: a a: o o: u
u: ai au>. How accurately do these correspond to the phonemes, either
yours or the ones quoted by Krishnamurti? In particular, what
orthographic vowels are used for your phonemes "1)" and "2)"?

John.

Nathan Sanders · Guest

In article
<514d6874-ac20-4a93-a502-5905e781bf64@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
"ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com" <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote:

[quote]On Jul 28, 2:14 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my vowels are
pretty close to what is considered general American). My
pronunciation of "putt" has an F1 of about 650 Hz; for "pot", my F1 is
about 760 Hz.

On the formant charts of many Continental European languages, 650Hz is
open enough to be pegged as the (Kirshenbaum/ Carresquer) [a"] rather
than as [@]
[/quote]
What matters are the relative values, not the absolute values. An F1
of 650 in isolation doesn>t tell you much.

Nathan

--
Nathan Sanders
Linguistics Program
Williams College
http://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/

Nathan Sanders · Guest

In article
<9490cb70-15ae-4c36-8e70-75cfcdbeaa85@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com" <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> wrote:

[quote]On Jul 28, 2:14 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
Not just shifted; also non-rhotic in various contexts. RFK didn>t
pronounce dot and dart the same way; yet, you>d have a <script-a> in
transcriptions of both.

Bostonian "dart" is [dat], not [d<script-a>t].

From what you said here ...
[p<script-a>t] for the "pat" and "pot".
... I thought IPA [dat] would become [d<script-a>t] in Sanders' PA.
[/quote]
The full quote is:

I would retain <script-a> for a low back vowel, so I>d use
[pæt] and [p<script-a>t] for the "pat" and "pot".

I should have added a "respectively", to make it clearer. (And
dropped "the", which was a remnant from a previous version of that
sentence.)

Nathan

--
Nathan Sanders
Linguistics Program
Williams College
http://wso.williams.edu/~nsanders/

Brian M. Scott · Guest

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:14:09 -0400, Nathan Sanders
<nsanders@williams.edu> wrote in
<news:nsanders-0CA0EB.03140928072008@news.newsguy.com> in
sci.lang:

[...]

[quote]"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my
vowels are pretty close to what is considered general
American).
[/quote]
I don>t think that I>ve heard it with an open vowel in any
U.S. variety, but I have heard [pat] from some southern BrE
speakers.

[...]

Brian

mb · Guest

On Jul 27, 1:12 pm, Sonja Elen Kisa <sonj...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
[quote]An area that has always bothered me is that most people use [a] to
refer to an open central unrounded vowel (instead of open front
unrounded) and then end up using [æ] to represent the open front
unrounded vowel (which should technically be [a]).

At this point, I don>t know if it would be more helpful for IPA to
officially redefine [a] as central instead of front, and [æ] as open
instead of near-open, to be in line with popular usage? Or maybe it
would satisfy me to see where these two symbols would be mapped on a
different shape to represent vowel space.

Any details on this problem?
[/quote]
Are you are asking IPA to redefine the worldwide most common vowel to
suit the special needs of (some, not all) English speakers? To assign
the symbol for a sound that is within /e/ or even /E/ in many
languages to plain basic [a]?

Perhaps I misinterpreted the whole discussion. If not, it sure is
irritating.

John Atkinson · Guest

Brian M. Scott wrote:
[quote]Nathan Sanders <nsanders@williams.edu> wrote:

[...]

"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my
vowels are pretty close to what is considered general
American).

I don>t think that I>ve heard it with an open vowel in any
U.S. variety, but I have heard [pat] from some southern BrE
speakers.
[/quote]
Yes, I>m one of these. For me, the only difference betwen the vowels of
<putt> and <part> is length -- they>re identical as regards both
openness and frontness.

John.

John Atkinson · Guest

ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 28, 9:46 am, "John Atkinson" <johna...@bigpond.com> wrote:
ranjit_math...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jul 28, 2:14 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@williams.edu> wrote:
ranjit:
The same vowel at the beginning and end of America makes me
uneasy; the former seems a little more closed than central and
the latter a little more open. But then, this might be because
the two qualities are orthographically (and possibly
phonemically) distinct in Malayalam.

Raising of schwa is a well-studied phenomena (generally speaking,
word-final schwa raises). In a narrow transcription, this raising
could be transcribed if desired (usually with [<barred-i>]). In a
broad transcription that ignores schwa-raising, [<schwa>] can be
used for both vowels.

I have 4 central vowels in my Malayalam; 3 of them phonemically
distinct:
1) barred i like in an American>s "Memphis".
2) [e"] like the last vowel in an American>s "buses".
3) [@] like in French "le"
4) [V] like the first vowek in an American>s "buses".

#3 is used only terminally and is (phonemically and?)
orthographically (in the Malayalam script) indistinct from #4. A
noun ending in [V] changes its ending to [@] when used as an
adjective.

Interesting. In the Malayalam analysed by Asher and Kumari (1997),
as quoted by Krishnamurti in the Cambridge green book, the vowel
phonemes are /i i: e e: a a: o o: u u: /, and, marginally, /æ /.
All are either front or back except /a a: /, which AFAICT are
central, and none seem to correspond with any in your list except
(perhaps) /a/, which might be your "3) and 4)".

#1 The so-called vocalic R is syllabic only inbetween a labial and a
velar (eg. krmi meaning worm). In other contexts, it is [r.i"]. Also,
in my dialect, /u/ becomes [i"] in some contexts; eg., /muRRam/ is
pronounced [mi"t_:@m] (an orthographic double trill is pronounced as a
long alveolar stop). Word terminal /u/ frequently becomes [i"] but
some some words irregularly (i.e., not based on phonetic context) have
a strong terminal /u/ that gets realized as [U]. So, I>d analyze my
dialect as having /i"/.
[/quote]
OK, I see what you>re getting at. I don>t know whether I>d agree that
this [i"] is phonemic -- I>d have to know a lot more about the language
to decide -- and, like you seem to be saying, it could be phonemic in
your dialect but not in another.

[quote]The script, of course, distinguishes the vowels <i i: e e: a a: o o:
u u: ai au>.

#2 too is distinguished by the script. Orthographically, it is written
as a virAmam, a half-moon above the consonant.
[/quote]
Can>t find this one in Krishnamurthi>s tables of combinations. But I>m
pretty sure he doesn>t cover everything anyway, it>s a pretty brief
summary.

[quote]In a terminal context,
it is pronounced as [e"], eg., /palle"/ meaning tooth.

#1 is distinguished to the extent that vocalic R (typically realized
as [r.i"]) is written differently from /*i / and /r.i /.

How accurately do these correspond to the phonemes, either
yours or the ones quoted by Krishnamurti? In particular, what
orthographic vowels are used for your phonemes "1)" and "2)"?

Note re. the orthographic vowel for #2: In a medial context, a virAmam
(half-moon above consonant) makes a consonant "vowel-less" (not
followed by a vowel). In a terminal context, it adds an [e"] after the
consonant. Those consonants that can occur in vowel-less form
terminally have an alternate grapheme (called [tZil:e"] in Malayalam)
for the vowel-less form of the consonant. These graphemes are not used
medially since in a medial context, a virAmam can be used to make the
consonant vowel-less.
[/quote]
OK, I can see that it>s quite complicated! (But no doubt considerably
more consistent that English spelling once one masters it.) Thanks for
all that.

John

Ekkehard Dengler · Guest

John Atkinson wrote:
[quote]Brian M. Scott wrote:
Nathan Sanders <nsanders@williams.edu> wrote:

[...]

"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my
vowels are pretty close to what is considered general
American).

I don>t think that I>ve heard it with an open vowel in any
U.S. variety, but I have heard [pat] from some southern BrE
speakers.

Yes, I>m one of these. For me, the only difference betwen the vowels
of <putt> and <part> is length -- they>re identical as regards both
openness and frontness.
[/quote]
That>s interesting. How would you describe your accent, if it>s not too
personal? I mean, where would you place it on the broad/cultivated continuum
(for want of a better term)? Do you pronounce a diphthong in "seen", for
instance?

I ask because AusE "part" typically has a *near*-open central vowel, as far
as I can tell. (Just to make sure we>re talking about the same thing: I mean
the central equivalent of IPA ash, i.e. upside-down <a>. Cf.
http://wso.williams.edu/~jdowse/ipa.html.) I>m not sure what the more
RP-like Australian accents have instead, but I would have expected an open
back vowel.

Regards,
Ekkehard

ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com · Guest

On Jul 29, 12:20 am, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 27, 1:12 pm, Sonja Elen Kisa <sonj...@gmail.com> wrote:
...

An area that has always bothered me is that most people use [a] to
refer to an open central unrounded vowel (instead of open front
unrounded) and then end up using [æ] to represent the open front
unrounded vowel (which should technically be [a]).

At this point, I don>t know if it would be more helpful for IPA to
officially redefine [a] as central instead of front, and [æ] as open
instead of near-open, to be in line with popular usage? Or maybe it
would satisfy me to see where these two symbols would be mapped on a
different shape to represent vowel space.

Any details on this problem?

Are you are asking IPA to redefine the worldwide most common vowel to
suit the special needs of (some, not all) English speakers? To assign
the symbol for a sound that is within /e/ or even /E/ in many
languages to plain basic [a]?
[/quote]
IPA [a] is used to describe sounds that seem very different to me. It
is said that British /&/ is realized as [a]. The French vowel
described as [a] sounds very different from this; it is halfway
between a British [a] and a central vowel. The Bostonian vowel
described as [a] sounds very different from both the British [a] and
French [a].

[quote]Perhaps I misinterpreted the whole discussion. If not, it sure is
irritating.[/quote]

mb · Guest

On Jul 29, 9:37 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 29, 12:20 am, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Jul 27, 1:12 pm, Sonja Elen Kisa <sonj...@gmail.com> wrote:
...

An area that has always bothered me is that most people use [a] to
refer to an open central unrounded vowel (instead of open front
unrounded) and then end up using [æ] to represent the open front
unrounded vowel (which should technically be [a]).

At this point, I don>t know if it would be more helpful for IPA to
officially redefine [a] as central instead of front, and [æ] as open
instead of near-open, to be in line with popular usage? Or maybe it
would satisfy me to see where these two symbols would be mapped on a
different shape to represent vowel space.

Any details on this problem?

Are you are asking IPA to redefine the worldwide most common vowel to
suit the special needs of (some, not all) English speakers? To assign
the symbol for a sound that is within /e/ or even /E/ in many
languages to plain basic [a]?

IPA [a] is used to describe sounds that seem very different to me. It
is said that British /&/ is realized as [a]. The French vowel
described as [a] sounds very different from this; it is halfway
between a British [a] and a central vowel. The Bostonian vowel
described as [a] sounds very different from both the British [a] and
French [a].
[/quote]
For the life of me I can>t see IPA [] symbols applying indifferently
from the language chosen, mainly because it takes conscious effort to
avoid being influenced by the phonemic divisions of one>s own
language. Also because IPA definitions must ignore a lot of hard-to-
define stuff like voice quality, mouth position, what will you. They
get a meaning when you discuss more precisely the range of [] in a
given // in a given language. Before discussing [a] any further it
would be a good idea to forget about anything that has to do with
English, a wildly atypical language in this respect. If the OP>s
proposal, which I still have not understood, boils down to requesting
that the IPA reshuffle such a basic sound description to please the
Anglophonous, one should consider the large number of languages that
have [a] as part of an /a/.

John Atkinson · Guest

Ekkehard Dengler wrote:
[quote]John Atkinson wrote:
Brian M. Scott wrote:
Nathan Sanders <nsanders@williams.edu> wrote:

[...]

"Putt" doesn>t have an open vowel, at least not for me (my
vowels are pretty close to what is considered general
American).

I don>t think that I>ve heard it with an open vowel in any
U.S. variety, but I have heard [pat] from some southern BrE
speakers.

Yes, I>m one of these. For me, the only difference between the
vowels
of <putt> and <part> is length -- they>re identical as regards both
openness and frontness.

That>s interesting. How would you describe your accent, if it>s not
too personal? I mean, where would you place it on the
broad/cultivated continuum (for want of a better term)?
[/quote]
"General Australian". Not really "Broad", but certainly not
"Cultivated". Of course, it varies with register (i.e., who I>m talking
to).

[quote]Do you pronounce a diphthong in "seen", for instance?
[/quote]
A little bit of off-glide, but not the obvious diphthong of Broad
speakers

[quote]I ask because AusE "part" typically has a *near*-open central vowel,
as far as I can tell.
[/quote]
Yes, I think that>s probably right. It>s as open as we get, but I
suspect none of our vowels are _fully_ open. Our PART vowel is further
forward than RP, but nearer central than front I think -- not nearly as
front as PAT.

[quote](Just to make sure we>re talking about the same
thing: I mean the central equivalent of IPA ash, i.e. upside-down
a>. Cf. http://wso.williams.edu/~jdowse/ipa.html.) I>m not sure what
the more RP-like Australian accents have instead, but I would have
expected an open back vowel.
[/quote]
Cultivated /a: / is further back than General or Broad /a: /, but not as
far back as in true RP, and certainly not as far back as the /A. / in
POT. Like RP, Cultivated is usually spoken with a more open mouth (what
we call "plummy").

John.

Sonja Elen Kisa · Guest

Is Praat able to calculate F2-prime, or is the formula posted
anywhere? Is F2-prime debatable, or is it generally agreed upon as
more accurate than F2 to map a vowel?

Sonja Elen Kisa · Guest

Wow, thanks again Nathan!! You are my hero.

Can I track nasality and roundedness with F1 and F2 prime or do I look
for this information in another way?

I>ll e-mail you my results one day. I>m mapping out the phonology of
the Chiac language of Southeast New Brunswick, Canada.

Sonja
www.tokipona.org


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Languages Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3