VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Sylvia Moosmüller<br />
previous segment (adjustment of constriction degree vs. no adjustment of constriction<br />
degree).<br />
5.3.1. The vowel /i/<br />
/s/ shows the least variability among the alveolar consonants (Hoole et al. 1990), i.e. it<br />
is quite resistant to coarticulation. The vowel /i/ is attributed high coarticulatory<br />
resistance as well (Recasens 1999, Fowler & Brancazio 2000) 101 . Recasens (1999)<br />
shows that the palatal contact is higher in the vicinity of /i/ as compared to /a/ and /u/,<br />
i.e. consonants are palatalised in the vicinity of a palatal vowel. Palatalization is a<br />
process common in many languages (see e.g. Fant 1970 for Russian), and Wood (1996)<br />
gives a detailed description of the articulatory movements involved in the palatalization<br />
of alveolar consonants in Bulgarian:<br />
"The palatal tongue body gesture of a front vowel in Bulgarian is thus phased in two<br />
different ways relative to the occlusion of an adjacent alveolar stop. To palatalize the closure<br />
flank the palatal posture of the assimilating vowel is held until the end of the pre-stop vocoid<br />
segment before being withdrawn. To palatalize the release flank, the palatal approach of the<br />
post-stop vowel is activated already during the preceding vocoid segment and continues<br />
during the alveolar occlusion in order to be in place at the release. The two different phasings<br />
indicate preplanning of this assimilation." (Wood 1996: 158)<br />
However, palatalization, a natural phonological process, can also be suppressed 102 :<br />
Wood (1975a, 1991c) could show that in Swedish palatalization of alveolar consonants<br />
is consistently avoided by implementing a pharyngeal movement:<br />
"This pharyngeal maneuver in apical [s] is clearly not a coarticulatory or assimilatory anticipation<br />
of a pharyngeal vowel since it occurs in every instance with nonpharyngeal vowels<br />
(...), and not when adjacent to a pharyngeal vowel (...)." ('Wood 1991c: 288)<br />
Wood (1996) concludes on his Swedish subjects:<br />
"Their alveolar consonants included a pharyngeal tongue body gesture that was antagonistic<br />
to the palatal tongue body gesture of an adjacent front vowel, and the two gestures were<br />
implemented sequentially rather than coproduced simultaneously." (Wood 1996: 159)<br />
101<br />
The notion of coarticulatory resistance, has, however, to be questioned (see Moosmüller<br />
2007b).<br />
102<br />
See Stampe (1979), Donegan & Stampe (1979) for the suppression of natural phonological<br />
processes.<br />
150