Untersuchungen zur spezifischen Dauer deutscher Vokale

Antoniadis, Zissis; Strube, Hans Werner

doi:10.1159/000261713

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…German short vowels are on average 94.7 ms long, while German long vowels are about 76% longer and measure 166.4 ms on average. With that, vowels in this study are slightly longer than those inAntoniadis and Strube (1984), possibly because words in our study were spoken in isolation and not in a carrier phrase. It seems that long vowels which are explicitly marked in their orthographic representation are produced slightly longer than unmarked ones.…”

mentioning

confidence: 65%

“…German long vowels are reported to be on average twice as long as their short counterparts. Antoniadis and Strube (1984) measured German vowel durations spoken in three different consonantal contexts in the form [CVCə] spoken in a carrier phrase. Their long vowels measured on average 154 ms and their short vowels measured about 72 ms.…”

Section: On the Role Of Orthography In L2 Vowel Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the role of orthography in L2 vowel production: The case of Polish learners of German

Nimz

Khattab

2019

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the role of orthography in German vowel production by Polish L1 speakers with German as an L2. Eighteen intermediate to advanced Polish L2 German learners and 20 German native speakers were recorded during a picture-naming task in which half of the experimental items were explicitly marked in their orthographic representation for their vowel length (short or long). Duration measurements revealed that explicit orthographic marking helped the Polish L2 German learners produce the short-long contrast more nativelike. The analysis of vowel quality further showed that (in)congruencies between L1 and L2 grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences may influence L2 vowel production as well. These findings have important implications for models of L2 speech learning and pronunciation training. 1997; Moyer, 1999). One of the greatest challenges for Polish L1 speakers with German as an L2 is the German vowel system (Hentschel, 1986; Hirschfeld, 1998; Morciniec, 1990). In contrast to Polish, which has six vowels and no phonological vowel length contrast, German exhibits a relatively high number of 15 vowel phonemes and makes use of a phonological distinction between long/tense and short/lax vowels (Pompino-Marschall, 2009). This leads to a number of minimal pairs that could potentially cause communication problems for L2 learners of German (e.g., Höhle /høːlə/ "cave" versus Hölle /hoelə/ "hell" or fühlen /fyːlən/ "to feel" versus füllen /fʏlən/ "to fill"). From an orthographic point of view, the long vowels in Höhle and fühlen are explicitly marked for their length by so called Dehnungs-h ("lengthening h"), which is a silent letter and a reliable marker for a preceding vowel to be ON THE ROLE OF ORTHOGRAPHY IN L2 VOWEL PRODUCTION long (Eisenberg, 2013). At the same time, the short vowels in Hölle and füllen are also explicitly marked for their length in that all German vowels which are followed by double consonant letters are short (Ramers, 1999). Since not all short and long vowels are explicitly marked for their length (e.g., Boden /boːdən/ "floor" or Wolke /vɔlkə/ "cloud") 1 , German is an ideal testing ground for the investigation of the effects of orthographic markings on L2 vowel productions. ON THE ROLE OF ORTHOGRAPHY IN L2 VOWEL PRODUCTIONL2 pronunciation researchers and teachers assume that orthographic cues such as lengthening h can help German L2 learners establish different phonetic categories for short and long vowels and hence produce them more native-like (e.g., Dieling, 1983; Dieling & Hirschfeld, 2007). However, experimental evidence to test this assumption is still missing.Furthermore, German and Polish use the same graphemes to represent similar vowel phonemes. Escudero et al. (2014) have shown that the "congruency" between L1 and L2 grapheme-to-phoneme (G-P) correspondences plays an important role in L2 sound perception and can both help and hinder L2 word learning. The influence of (in)congruencies between L1 and L2 G-P mappings might also be relevant for L2 vowel production. Polish L2...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: On the Role Of Orthography In L2 Vowel Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the role of orthography in L2 vowel production: The case of Polish learners of German

Nimz

Khattab

2019

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…House 1961, Antoniadis & Strube 1984, Whitworth 2003, Mooshammer & Geng 2008. To determine whether the mean vowel duration values differ significantly across the three groups, a one-way ANOVA was carried out.…”

Section: Vowel Durationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What exactly is a front rounded vowel? An acoustic and articulatory investigation of thenursevowel in South Wales English

Mayr

2010

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Descriptive reports of South Wales English indicate front rounded realizations of the NURSE vowel (e.g. Wells 1982;Collins & Mees 1990;Mees & Collins 1999;Walters 1999Walters , 2001). However, the specific phonetic properties of the vowel are not depicted uniformly in these studies. In addition, they have relied entirely on auditory descriptions, rather than instrumental measurements. The study presented here is the first to provide a systematic acoustic and articulatory investigation of the NURSE vowel in South Wales English, and to explore its relationship to realizations of Standard Southern British English / …/ and Standard German /ø…/. The results indicate systematic differences between the three vowels, with the South Wales English vowel produced with an open rounded lip posture, yet the acoustic characteristics of an unrounded front vowel. Implications for the notion of 'front-rounding' are discussed.

show abstract

“…Standard German comprises a set of eight tense monophthongs, i.e., [iː,eː,ɛː,ɑː,oː,uː,ʸː,øː] and seven lax ones, i.e., [ɪ,ɛ,a,ɔ,ʊ,ʏ,œ], as well as [ə] and [ɐ], which only occur in unstressed syllables. The tense monophthongs are generally longer and more peripheral in the vowel space than their lax counterparts, although [ɑː] and [a] only differ in terms of duration (Jørgensen, 1969; Antoniadis and Strube, 1984; Bohn and Flege, 1990, 1992). In spectral terms, German distinguishes the five front unrounded vowels [iː,eː,ɪ,ɛː,ɛ], the four back rounded vowels [uː,ʊ,oː,ɔ], the four front rounded vowels [ʸː,ʏ,øː,œ], the two central vowels [ə,ɐ], and the two open vowels [ɑː,a].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining individual variation in L2 perception: Rounded vowels in English learners of German

Mayr

Escudero

2010

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Untersuchungen zur spezifischen Dauer deutscher Vokale

Cited by 19 publications

References 1 publication

On the role of orthography in L2 vowel production: The case of Polish learners of German

On the role of orthography in L2 vowel production: The case of Polish learners of German

What exactly is a front rounded vowel? An acoustic and articulatory investigation of thenursevowel in South Wales English

Explaining individual variation in L2 perception: Rounded vowels in English learners of German

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About