L Lezgi in the typological i i th t l i l context of vowel - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ioana Chitoran Ioana Chitoran

Dartmouth College, USA

L i i th t l i l Lezgi in the typological context of vowel devoicing context of vowel devoicing

Conference on Caucasian Languages MPI, Leipzig, 13-15 May 2011 MPI, Leipzig, 13 15 May 2011

Work in collaboration with: Work in collaboration with:

• Khalil Iskarous, Haskins Laboratories &

University of Southern California, USA y f f ,

• Egidio Marsico, Laboratoire “Dynamique du

L ” CNRS L F Langage”, CNRS, Lyon, France

2

Goal of today’s talk Goal of today s talk

• To examine a well-documented process of

vowel loss in Lezgi vowel loss in Lezgi

• To propose vowel devoicing (VDev),

b d i d l id based on acoustic and perceptual evidence

3

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of Vdev phenomena

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

4

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of Vdev phenomena

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

5

Most common conditions for VDev Most common conditions for VDev

In a C1VC2 sequence In a C1VC2 sequence

• a. Predominantly high vowel
• a. Predominantly high vowel
• b. At least one voiceless consonant (especially

voiceless fricatives and aspirated stops) voiceless fricatives and aspirated stops)

• c. Unstressed/unaccented vowel

d U d d l

• d. Unrounded vowel

Cho 1993, Gordon 1998, Chitoran & Marsico 2010

6

Some examples: Some examples:

Quebec French Quebec French tisse ['tis]

‘s/he weaves’

ti [ i' ] tissu [ti'sy]

‘fabric’

Turkish tüfek [ty'fek] ‘rifle’ Japanese Japanese [ɕikíso]

‘pigment’

[ té ́] [sɯtérɯ́]

‘to throw’

7

Properties Properties

• VDev is phonetically common
• Highly variable: within and across
• Highly variable: within and across

languages and speakers

• Distinguish positional (word phrase utterance final)
• Distinguish positional (word-, phrase-, utterance-final)
• vs. non-positional devoicing (Chitoran & Marsico

2010)

• Often reported as a particular manifestation
• f vowel reduction or deletion.

8

Vowel devoicing database

(Chitoran & Marsico 2010)

Th i Three main sources:

• 1. Gordon 1998 (55 languages)
• 2. UPSID 451 (Maddieson 1984; Maddieson & Precoda 1990)

3 Addi i l d f i l 100 l

• 3. Additional data from approximately 100 languages

(grammars and articles)

We retained 39 languages with devoicing.

9

Genetic and geographic distribution of h l the sample

10

Non-positional devoicing is more common

Of the 39 languages:

• Positional devoicing only

12

• Non-positional devoicing only

22

• Both types of devoicing

5 Both types of devoicing 5

11

Phonetic accounts Phonetic accounts

Non-positional VDev is understood as an p assimilatory process

• Aerodynamic voicing constraint (Ohala 1983)
• Aerodynamic voicing constraint (Ohala 1983)

– Insufficient transglottal pressure differential – Narrow constriction of high V impedes air flow g

• Glottal gesture overlap (e.g., Jun & Beckman 1993)

Absence of stress shortens V increasing overlap – Absence of stress shortens V, increasing overlap between C1 and C2 – Glottal opening gesture of C may extend over the V gesture gesture

12

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of VDev

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

13

The Lezgi facts g

• High vowels [i, y, u] disappear in pre-stress

position, after a voiceless obstruent – “syncope / d i / d l i ” reduction / deletion”

• May be perceived as secondary articulations on

C1 C1

Uslar 1896, Talibov 1980, Kodzasov 1990, Haspelmath 1993

• Daghestan dialect

Babaliyeva 2007 - Azerbaijan dialect

14

Morphological alternations Morphological alternations

Monosyllabic roots Monosyllabic roots

absolutive singular absolutive plural absolutive singular absolutive plural (root stress) (no root stress)

sík’ sik’ ár

‘f ’

sík sik - ár

‘fox’

tʃhúf tʃhuf - ár

‘cloud’

thúph thup ár

‘ ’

thúph thup - ár

cannon

tʃhýkh tʃhykw - ér

‘flower’

All data from Azerbaijan dialect

15

Disyllabic roots Disyllabic roots

No stress alternation khitáb khitáb - ar

‘book’

k táb k táb ar

book

thykwén thykwén - ar

‘shop’

h

’ál

h

’ ál thup’ál thup’ ál - ar

‘ring’

tʃhuk’úl tʃhuk’úl - ar

‘knife’ Can be reflected in orthography: ktab, ktabar, Qsar (Qusar)

(for more examples see Haspelmath 1993: 36)

16

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of VDev

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

17

Qualitative acoustic description Qualitative acoustic description

Data from 7 speakers recorded in Azerbaijan f p j

During the vowel portion: –No periodic voicing No periodic voicing –Unclear formant structure Strong frication noise –Strong frication noise E l tʃhuk’úl ‘k if ’ Examples: tʃhuk’úl ‘knife’ sik’-ar ‘fox’ pl.

18

[tʃhuk’úl] ‘knife’ [ ʃ ] f

19

[ … a # tʃh

u

k’

u l # s…]

[sik’-ar] ‘fox’ pl. [ ] f p

20

[ s

i

k’ a r ]

Presence of a vocalic gesture Presence of a vocalic gesture

Evidence from secondary labialization of (non-labial) C2

• Voiced C1 – variable labialization

lytkhe ~ lytkhwe

‘boat’

lytk e lytk e

boat

ʁud ʁut – ar ~ ʁutw – ar

‘fist’

• V i

l C1 r t ti l bi li ti n

• Voiceless C1 – more systematic labialization

singular plural(more regular) k’ k’ khuk’w

‘ k’

k’uk’ khuk’w – ar

‘peak’

tyd thytw – er

‘throat’

tʃhykh tʃhykw – er

‘flower’

21

ʃ y ʃ

f

Acoustic evidence

(Chitoran & Iskarous 2008)

Acoustic evidence

(Chitoran & Iskarous 2008)

• Hypothesis:

If V gesture is still present similar fricative-V coarticulation patterns will be found in both stress coarticulation patterns will be found in both stress contexts. C i f DFT t f [ ] di Comparison of DFT spectra of [s] preceding stressed and unstressed V

sík’ – sik’ár vs. súth – sutár vs. sáf – safár

‘fox’ ‘measure of land’ ‘sieve’

22

f f

Local spectral properties Local spectral properties

• Data from 7 speakers

Data from 7 speakers

• Two windows extracted from each fricative:
• 2/3 into [s] (40 ms)
• last 1/3 of [s] (40 ms)

Differences among [i y u] are visible in the Differences among [i,y,u] are visible in the energy between 4 and 9 kHz

23

Energy between 4 - 9 kHz, averaged across f frequency

[sík] [sikár] [sáf] [safár] [sík] [sikár] [sút] [sutár]

24

Results Results

• Coarticulation patterns in [sik’, suth] (full

V) are similar to those in [sik’ar sutar] V) are similar to those in [sik ar, sutar] (non-full V) S f V i b h

• Suggests presence of V gesture in both

stressed and unstressed contexts

25

Acoustic duration of [s] Acoustic duration of [s]

• Hypothesis:

Hypothesis: If V is present but devoiced, [s] will be longer before non-full Vs (sup-ar, sut-ar) longer before non full Vs (s p ar, s t ar) than before full Vs (saf-ar, sal-ar, sam-ar)

• Interpretation:

Interpretation: The longer [s] duration corresponds to the devoiced vocalic portion, visible as devoiced vocalic portion, visible as increased frication due to a highly constricted V gesture g

26

[s] duration (ms) is longer before [u] h b f [ ]

(non-full V) than before [a] (full V)

250 200 100 150 [su] 50 100 [sa] sp1 sp2 sp3 sp4 sp5 sp6

27

sp1 sp2 sp3 sp4 sp5 sp6

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of VDev

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

28

Perception Perception

Hypothesis: Hypothesis:

• If the V gesture is present in the stressed

environment only: environment only:

– coarticulation effects on the fricative should be present only in that environment be present only in that environment – the identification rate for the V should be higher in the stressed environment higher in the stressed environment

(cf. Beckman & Shoji 1984 for Japanese)

29

Experiment F d h i id ifi i Forced choice identification

Sti li [ ] i d f l L i d

• Stimuli – [s] excised from real Lezgi words,

in stressed and unstressed context

h i

s(ík’), s(úth), s(áf) s(ik’ár), s(utár), s(afár)

• Three response choices:

p “si”, “su”, “sa”

• Participants: Native speakers of French (11)
• Participants: Native speakers of French (11),

Japanese (9), Lezgi (2)

30

Stimuli Stimuli

For each fricative, 6 portions were presented, For each fricative, 6 portions were presented, randomized: 1

• first third of [s]

1 first third of [s] 2

• second (middle)

3

• third (end)

3

• third (end)

4

• first + second third

5 d + thi d 5

• second + third

6

• full fricative

f h ll d d 5 repetitions of each, all randomized

31

Identification rate of Lezgi Vs as a function of t stress

1 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0.4 0.5 0.6 nostress 0.1 0.2 0.3 stress sa si su sa si su sa si su J speakers F speakers LZ speakers

32

9 Japanese listeners 11 French listeners 2 Lezgi listeners

Results Results

• Different identification patterns for [sa] vs

Different identification patterns for [sa] vs. [si, su]

• [si su] have comparable (relatively high)
• [si, su] have comparable (relatively high)

identification rates in both stressed and unstressed environments unstressed environments

• Identification of [u] is the least affected by

t

• b

t ti ff t f l bi lit stress robust acoustic effects of labiality Support for the presence of a vowel gesture

33

Outline Outline

• 1. A typology of VDev

2 Th l d i L i

• 2. The relevant data in Lezgi
• 3. The interpretation of acoustic evidence
• 4. The interpretation of perceptual evidence

5 Implications for sound change

• 5. Implications for sound change

34

• The speech production system seen as a

p p y dynamical system

• A change in progress is a transition state

g p g

• From instability to stability:

– of categories, allophonic variation g , p – gradient, phonetic variation is not necessarily eliminated (“stable variation”)

• VDev is phonetically common but

p y phonologically rare

(allophonic variation in Japanese, Korean)

35

Relevant properties Relevant properties

• The variation in Lezgi is gradient

The variation in Lezgi is gradient, quantitative variation resulting from variable overlap variable overlap.

• The role of morphology

E id f h h

• Evidence from orthography
• Initial C clusters – very few (ʧka ‘place’ < ʧi’ka)
• Very slow progress (by comparing Uslar 1896 and

Haspelmath 1993)

36

Predictions Predictions

• V loss for polysyllabic roots only except

V loss for polysyllabic roots only, except for:

– Secondary labialization in the case of [u] – Secondary labialization in the case of [u]

• No loss for monosyllabic roots, protected

b h l i l lt ti by morphological alternation

– Possibly maintain VDev or phonemic secondary articulations (especially labialization)

37

Conclusions Conclusions

• Some evidence from production and

Some evidence from production and perception: vowel devoicing may be present in Lezgi present in Lezgi.

• The interaction of phonetic and

morphological factors predicts that the morphological factors predicts that the language may reach a stage of allophonic variation rather than complete vowel loss variation, rather than complete vowel loss.

38

Thank you Thank you

Acknowledgments:

• All native speaker participants
• Richard Barton (Dartmouth), Emmanuel Ferragne (DDL,

L ) Lyon)

• Kim Betts, research assistant
• The Dickey Center for International Understanding

The Dickey Center for International Understanding, Dartmouth College

39

References

• Babaliyeva, A. 2007. Présentation du dialecte Lezgi de Yargun (Azerbaïdjan):

grammaire, textes glosés et traduits. Mémoire principal de Master II, Ecole Pratique d H E d P i des Hautes Etudes, Paris.

• Beckman & Shoji. 1984. Spectral and perceptual evidence for CV coarticulation in

devoiced /si/ and /syu/ in Japanese. Phonetica 41. 61-71

• Chitoran & Iskarous. 2008. Acoustic evidence for high vowel devoicing in Lezgi. In

g g g Socks et al. (eds.) Proceedings of ISSP 8, Strasbourg, France, December 2008. 93-96

• Chitoran & Marsico. 2010a. Vowel devoicing – an updated phonetic typology.

Paper presented at BLS 36. February 2010

• Chitoran & Marsico 2010b A perceptual test of language-specific temporal

Chitoran & Marsico. 2010b. A perceptual test of language specific temporal

• rganization. Poster presented at LabPhon 12, U of New Mexico, July 2010.
• Cho. 1993. The phonology and phonetics of voiceless vowels. BLS 19. 64-75
• Gordon. 1998. The phonetics and phonology of non-modal vowels: a cross-

linguistic perspective BLS 24 93 105 linguistic perspective. BLS 24. 93-105

• Haspelmath, M. 1993. A Grammar of Lezgian. Mouton de Gruyter
• Jun & Beckman. 1993. A gestural-overlap analysis of vowel devoicing in Japanese

and Korean. Paper presented at January 1993 LSA Meeting, Los Angeles, CA

• Kodzasov, S. 1990. Fonetika. In A.E. Kibrik & S.V. Kodzasov (eds.) Sopostovitel’noe

izuchenie dagestanskix jazykov Moscow. 311-347

• Ohala. 1983. The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. In MacNeilage

(ed.) The Production of Speech. 189-216 ( ) p

• Talibov, B.B. 1980. Sravnitel’naja fonetika lezginskix jazykov Nauka: Moscow.
• Uslar, P.K. 1896. Etnografija Kavkaza. Jazykoznanie. VI. Kjurinskij jazyk. Tbilisi.

40