VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
VOWELS IN STANDARD AUSTRIAN GERMAN - Acoustics ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Sylvia Moosmüller<br />
Wood (1975b, 1979) found constriction degree contrastive for the tense/lax<br />
opposition in English and Egyptian Arabic. The degree of constriction is narrower for<br />
tense vowels in all pairs except [o, O]. In this pair, the constriction is wider for [o] than<br />
for [O], “although both ranges virtually overlap” (1975b: 112 ff). In their investigation<br />
of German vowels, Pouplier et al. (2004) found no inverse relationship of tongue-palate<br />
distances of the vowel pair [o] – [O], i.e. the tongue-palate distance for [O] was greater<br />
than for [o]. In the investigation of Pouplier et al. (2004), tongue-palate distance was<br />
neutralised for [i] – [ç] in all subjects and for [u] – [ï] in two subjects. For German,<br />
Hoole & Mooshammer (2002) confirmed Wood’s results on the front vowels: /e/ ex-<br />
poses a higher tongue position than /ç/. The results presented in Pouplier et al. (2004)<br />
show intersubject variability: two subjects expose no differences, one subject has a<br />
higher tongue-palate distance for /e/. For the front unrounded vowels Wood (1982)<br />
concludes<br />
“that the tongue is higher and more bunched relative to the mandible for the tense vowels [i,<br />
e] and lower, flatter and bulging further into the pharynx for the lax vowels [ç, E]. This<br />
difference is performed with the mandible raised (for close [i, ç]) and lowered (for open [e,<br />
E])”. (Wood 1982: 140f).<br />
The results on the front unrounded vowels presented by Wood (1982) and corroborated<br />
by Fischer-Jørgensen (1990) and Valaczkai (1998) 68 clearly set apart two features which<br />
are often used synonymously, namely the degree of constriction 69 (tongue height) and<br />
the degree of jaw opening, i.e. tongue height is not accompanied by a concomitant<br />
adjustment of jaw position 70 . It follows that the “e-vowels” and “i-vowels” are grouped<br />
by jaw opening – the opening of the e-vowels is larger than 8 – 9 mm, whereas the<br />
68<br />
Although in Valaczkai (1998), the degree of lip opening is greater for the respective “lax”<br />
vowel.<br />
69<br />
For the front vowels, constriction degree is equivalent to tongue-palate distance.<br />
70<br />
Sievers (1901:100), who introduced the features “tense” and “lax”, also clearly<br />
distinguishes this pair from the pair “open” and “close”: “Man hüte sich auch davor, die<br />
Begriffe ‘gespannt’ (oder ‘eng’) und ‘ungespannt’ (oder ‘weit’) mit denen zu<br />
verwechseln, welche die althergebrachten Ausdrücke ‘geschlossen’ und ‘offen’<br />
bezeichnen sollen. Diese letzteren wollen nur aussagen, dass ein Vocal geringere oder<br />
grössere Mundweite habe als ein anderer, aber ohne alle Rücksicht auf die<br />
Verschiedenheit der Articulationsweise, welche die Differenzen der Mundweite im<br />
einzelnen Fall hervorruft,…”<br />
78