Preaspiration in the Nordic Languages: Synchronic and Diachronic ...

As regards nasal + fortis stop sequences, none of the CSw subjects
seem to have any general tendency towards producing an interval of
voicelessness in the nasal. However, as indicated in section 4.2.2.3, in
which sequences of nasal + fortis stop that occur across a word boundary
were discussed, one can often detect a slight friction noise on the boundary
of a nasal and an occlusion that is indicative of voicelessness. Importantly,
the duration of these periods of voicelessness and the frequency
with which they occur are not in any way comparable to the frequency of
occurrence and duration of postvocalic preaspiration.
h ˜ s
Figure 4–18. Subj. FS: […vackra Figure 4–19. Subj. CK: […] strunta i
buktk]anten ‘…beautiful bay [dom…] ‘ignore them’
contour…’
Figure 4–18 shows one such sequence produced by subject FS. The
friction noise is visible just before the stop closure is made and is approximately
25 ms in duration. This represents one of the longer periods
of voiceless nasality found in the CSw data. In Figure 4–19, CK produces
a nasal + fortis stop sequence in which no detectable voicelessness.
All subjects show some tendency towards producing friction in a lateral
before a fortis stop, especially before dentals. Figure 4–20 gives an
example of a very short friction noise produced by FS in her production
of the word kälke ‘sleigh.’ In the speech of both CK and FS, such friction
is often concomitant with voice offset, such that a voiceless lateral fricative
is produced. An example of this is provided in Figure 4–21, in which
FS produces the word tältet ‘the tent’ (see also Figure 4–30, in which CK
– 132 –