Variability in the implementation of voicing in American English obstruents

Davidson, Lisa

doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2015.09.003

Cited by 116 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

126

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While cues for voiced obstruents are weak in the coda position compared to the onset position (Wright 2004), production of voiced obstruents is also degraded in coda position, particularly when followed by another obstruent (Davidson 2016). Davidson (2016) showed that production of voicing differs for stops and fricative depending on the context; stops were more likely to be voiced in word final position than fricatives. It is very likely that the differences in production in various contexts interact with perceptual cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptually Based Constraints and Metathesis: Evidence from Artificial Grammar

Finley

2017

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper explores the role of sonority and other perceptual constraints in governing syllable structure constraints. One of the most important issues in phonology today is the formalization of the phonetic grounding of markedness constraints (Hayes and Steriade 2004). Sonority constraints have been particularly controversial because there is no formalized definition of sonority, but rather several different contributing factors, such as intensity, constriction and formant transitions, that all vary depending on context (Henke, Kaisse, and Wright 2012; Wright 2004). This paper makes use of an artificial grammar learning paradigm, whereby adult English speakers were exposed to a consonant-consonant metathesis pattern that either improved sonority at a syllable boundary, or worsened sonority at a syllable boundary. Learners did not show generalization in line with sonority-based syllable contact laws, but instead showed generalization in accordance with avoidance of a voiced obstruent in coda position, thus supporting a theory of sonority and syllable contact that makes use of the interaction of perceptual cues, rather than a strict, abstract sonority hierarchy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptually Based Constraints and Metathesis: Evidence from Artificial Grammar

Finley

2017

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Poolhelilise sulufaasi puhul mõõdetakse enamasti heliliseks muutumise määra. Davidson (2016) eristas osalise helilistumise neli tüüpi selle järgi, millises sulu osas helilisus ilmnes: eelneva hääliku helilisuse kandumine klusiili algusossa (bleed), negatiivne VOT (negative VOT) -helilisuse tekkimine enne sulu vallandumist, läbiv helilistumine (through) -kahe eelmise kombinatsioon, helilisuse ilmumine ja kadumine sulu jooksul (hump). Inglise keele seotud kõnes esinevad enamasti bleed-ja through-tüüp.…”

Section: Sulghäälikute Fonatsioonunclassified

Eesti keele lühikeste klusiilide häälduse variatsioon ja seda mõjutavad tegurid

Ermus

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One way of delaying pressure equalization and the consequent stoppage of voicing is through enlargement of the supralaryngeal cavities (Westbury, 1983). In contrast with citation forms and very deliberate running speech, after a voiceless segment glottal pulsing may have a delayed onset in the following closure of a “voiced” stop or, especially in English (Baran, Laufer, & Daniloff, 1977; Davidson, 2016) no pulsing at all or short stretches of pulsing followed by silence until the moment of consonant release. (A detailed list of such combinations can be found in Docherty, 1992, p.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A small amount of voicing at the beginning of intervocalic closures was referred to as “edge vibrations” in the original article (Lisker & Abramson, 1964, p. 417). Such examples can be seen in Davidson (2016, p. 43), labeled as “bleed”; nonetheless, she only classifies one of the four patterns with voicing in the closure as “negative VOT.” Her criterion is that “partial voicing” occurs when 10–90% of the closure is voiced. This makes it unclear how to categorize the VOT in those cases, on the assumption that we should be able to provide a VOT in all cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice Onset Time (VOT) at 50: Theoretical and practical issues in measuring voicing distinctions

Abramson

Whalen

2017

Journal of Phonetics

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Just over fifty years ago, Lisker and Abramson proposed a straightforward measure of acoustic differences among stop consonants of different voicing categories, voice onset time (VOT). Since that time, hundreds of studies have used this method. Here, we review the original definition of VOT, propose some extensions to the definition, and discuss some problematic cases. We propose a set of terms for the most important aspects of VOT and a set of Praat labels that could provide some consistency for future cross-study analyses. Although additions of other aspects of realization of voicing distinctions (F0, amplitude, duration of voicelessness) could be considered, they are rejected as adding too much complexity for what has turned out to be one of the most frequently used metrics in phonetics and phonology.

show abstract

Variability in the implementation of voicing in American English obstruents

Cited by 116 publications

References 41 publications

Perceptually Based Constraints and Metathesis: Evidence from Artificial Grammar

Perceptually Based Constraints and Metathesis: Evidence from Artificial Grammar

Eesti keele lühikeste klusiilide häälduse variatsioon ja seda mõjutavad tegurid

Voice Onset Time (VOT) at 50: Theoretical and practical issues in measuring voicing distinctions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About