Positional Neutralization - Linguistics - University of California ...

Ladefoged (2001: 386) describe it as owing to “vocal folds tightly adducted but open
enough along a portion of the length to allow for voicing”. Ladefoged and Maddieson
(1996: 53) speak of “a great deal of tension in the intrinsic laryngeal musculature”, and
note that for a given amount of subglottal pressure, the tight adduction of the vocal folds
yields substantially lower rates of airflow through the glottis than would be the case for
modal voicing (1996: 50). From this we can extrapolate that for a given rate of airflow
through the glottis, creaky phonation should require greater subglottal pressure than
modal voice. The facts concerning pitch are ambiguous (and tellingly so, as will be
shown): Creaky phonation is most commonly associated with a low F0 relative to modal
voice, but in many languages is in fact correlated with high F0 tonal contours (Gordon
and Ladefoged 2001: 400). This latter is odd, particularly in light of Silverman’s (1997:
149-152) discussion of the interaction of creaky voice and pitch. Silverman notes that in
many ways high F0 and creaky phonation are actually far more compatible than low F0
and creaky phonation, given the articulatory properties attributed to both (1997: 150-
151):
First, low pitch involves decreased vocal fold tension, while creakiness is enhanced by
increasing vocal fold tension. Also, creakiness is enhanced by increasing subglottal pressure,
while lowness is enhanced by reducing subglottal pressure. Finally, low tones involve
pronounced larynx lowering, while creakiness may be accompanied by larynx raising.
214