Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Articulatory and Acoustic Characteristics of German Fricative Clusters

  • and
Published/Copyright: February 9, 2016

Abstract

Background: We investigate the articulatory-acoustic relationship in German fricative sequences. We pursue the possibility that /f/#sibilant and /s#ʃ/ sequences are in principle subject to articulatory overlap in a similar fashion, yet due to independent articulators being involved, there is a significant difference in the acoustic consequences. We also investigate the role of vowel context and stress. Methods: We recorded electropalatographic and acoustic data from 9 native speakers of German. Results: Results are compatible with the hypothesis that the temporal organization of fricative clusters is globally independent of cluster type with differences between clusters appearing mainly in degree. Articulatory overlap may be obscured acoustically by a labiodental constriction, similarly to what has been reported for stops. Conclusion: Our data suggest that similar principles of articulatory coordination underlie German fricative clusters independently of their segmental composition. The general auditory-acoustic patterning of the fricative sequences can be predicted by taking into account that aerodynamicacoustic consequences of gestural overlap may vary as a function of the articulators involved. We discuss possible sources for differences in degrees of overlap and place our results in the context of previously reported asymmetries among the fricatives in regressive place assimilation.


verified



*Marianne Pouplier, Institute of Phonetics, LMU, Schellingstrasse 3, DE-80799 München (Germany), E-Mail pouplier@phonetik.uni-muenchen.de

References

1 Baayen RH (2008 ): Analyzing Linguistic Data. A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511801686Search in Google Scholar

2 Babel M, McGuire G (2013): Listener expectations and gender bias in nonsibilant fricative perception. Phonetica 70:117-151.10.1159/000354644Search in Google Scholar

3 Bombien L, Mooshammer C, Hoole P (2013): Articulatory coordination in word-initial clusters of German. J Phonet 41:546-561.10.1016/j.wocn.2013.07.006Search in Google Scholar

4 Bombien L, Mooshammer C, Hoole P, Kühnert B (2010): Prosodic segmental effects on EPG contact patterns of word-initial German clusters. J Phonet 38:388-403.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.03.003Search in Google Scholar

5 Browman C (1995): Assimilation as gestural overlap: comments on Holst and Nolan; in Connell B, Arvaniti A (eds): Phonology and Phonetic Evidence. Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 334-342.Search in Google Scholar

6 Browman C, Goldstein L (1990): Tiers in articulatory phonology, with some implications for casual speech; in Kingston J, Beckman ME (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology. I. Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 340-376.Search in Google Scholar

7 Byrd D (1992): Perception of assimilation in consonant clusters: a gestural model. Phonetica 49:1-24.10.1159/000261900Search in Google Scholar

8 Cho T, McQueen JM (2005): Prosodic influences on consonant production in Dutch: effects of prosodic boundaries, phrasal accent and lexical stress. J Phonet 33:121-157.10.1016/j.wocn.2005.01.001Search in Google Scholar

9 Ellis L, Hardcastle W (2002): Categorical and gradient properties of assimilation in alveolar to velar sequences: evidence from EPG and EMA data. J Phonet 30:373-396.10.1006/jpho.2001.0162Search in Google Scholar

10 Farnetani E, Recasens D (2010): Coarticulation and connected speech processes; in Hardcastle J, Laver FE, Gibbon WJ (eds): The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, ed 2. Hoboken, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 316-352.Search in Google Scholar

11 Goldrick M, Larson M (2008): Phonotactic probability influences speech production. Cognition 107:1155-1164.10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.009Search in Google Scholar

12 Gusik KM, Harrington J (2007): The quantification of place of articulation assimilation in electropalatographic data using the similarity index (SI). Adv Speech Lang Pathol 9:109-119.10.1080/07268600601094294Search in Google Scholar

13 Harrington J, Hoole P, Pouplier M (2013): Future directions in speech production; in Knight R-A, Jones M (eds): The Bloomsbury Companion to Phonetics. London, Bloomsbury, pp 242-259.Search in Google Scholar

14 Hura SL, Lindblom B, Diehl RL (1992): On the role of perception in shaping phonological assimilation rules. Lang Speech 35:59-72.10.1177/002383099203500206Search in Google Scholar

15 Iskarous K, McDonough J, Whalen D (2012): A gestural account of the velar fricative in Navajo. Lab Phonol 3:195-210.10.1515/lp-2012-0011Search in Google Scholar

16 Iskarous K, Pouplier M, Marin S, Harrington J (2010): The interaction between prosodic boundaries and accent in the production of sibilants. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Speech Prosody, Chicago.Search in Google Scholar

17 Jaeger M, Hoole P (2011): Articulatory factors influencing regressive place assimilation across word-boundaries in German. J Phonet 39:413-428.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.03.002Search in Google Scholar

18 Jun J (1995): Perceptual and Articulatory Factors in Place Assimilation: An Optimality Theoretic Approach; PhD dissertation, UCLA, Los Angeles.Search in Google Scholar

19 Jun J (2004): Place assimilation; in Hayes B, Kirchner R, Steriade D (eds): Phonetically Based Phonology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 58-86.Search in Google Scholar

20 Kohler K (1990): Segmental reduction in connected speech in German: phonological facts and phonetic explanations; in Hardcastle WJ, Marchal A (eds): Speech Production and Speech Modelling. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp 69-92.Search in Google Scholar

21 Miller GA, Nicely PE (1955): An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. J Acoust Soc Am 27:338-352.10.1121/1.1907526Search in Google Scholar

22 Möbius B, van Santen J (1996): Modeling segmental duration in German text-to-speech synthesis. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Philadelphia, vol 4, pp 2395-2398.10.21437/ICSLP.1996-601Search in Google Scholar

23 Niebuhr O, Clayards M, Meunier C, Lancia L (2011): On place assimilation in sibilant sequences - comparing French and English. J Phonet 39:429-451.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.04.003Search in Google Scholar

24 Nolan F (1992): The descriptive role of segments: evidence from assimilation; in Docherty GJ, Ladd DR (eds): Laboratory Phonology. II. Gesture, Segment, Prosody. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 261-280.10.1017/CBO9780511519918.011Search in Google Scholar

25 Nolan F, Holst T, Kühnert B (1996): Modelling [s] to [sh] accomodation in English. J Phonet 24:113-137.10.1006/jpho.1996.0008Search in Google Scholar

26 Ohala J (1993): Coarticulation and phonology. Lang Speech 36:155-170.10.1177/002383099303600303Search in Google Scholar

27 Perkell JS, Boyce SE, Stevens K (1979): Articulatory and acoustic correlations of the [s-š] distinction. Speech Communication Papers Presented at the 97th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Cambridge, pp 109-113.Search in Google Scholar

28 Piroth HG, Janker PM (2004): Speaker-dependent differences in voicing and devoicing of German obstruents. J Phonet 32:81-109.10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00008-1Search in Google Scholar

29 Pouplier M, Hoole P, Scobbie J (2011): Investigating the asymmetry of English sibilant assimilation: acoustic and EPG data. J Lab Phonol 2:1-33.10.1515/labphon.2011.001Search in Google Scholar

30 Recasens D (2006): Integrating coarticulation, blending and assimilation into a model of articulatory constraints; in Goldstein L, Whalen D, Best C (eds): Laboratory Phonology 8. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 611-634.Search in Google Scholar

31 Recasens D, Espinosa A (2009): An articulatory investigation of lingual coarticulatory resistance and aggressiveness for consonants and vowels in Catalan. J Acoust Soc Am 125:2288-2298.10.1121/1.3089222Search in Google Scholar

32 Recasens D, Mira M (2013): An articulatory and acoustic study of the fricative clusters /sS/ and /Ss/ in Catalan.10.1159/000356628Search in Google Scholar

33 Recasens D, Pallarès MD (2001): Coarticulation, blending and assimilation in Catalan consonant clusters. J Phonet 29:273-301.10.1006/jpho.2001.0139Search in Google Scholar

34 Russ CVJ (ed) (1990): The Dialects of Modern German. A Linguistic Survey. London, Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

35 Scarborough R (2013): Neighborhood-conditioned patterns in phonetic detail: relating coarticulation and hyperarticulation. J Phonet 41:491-508.10.1016/j.wocn.2013.09.004Search in Google Scholar

36 Schiel F (1999): Automatic phonetic transcription of non-prompted speech. Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, San Francisco, pp 607-610.Search in Google Scholar

37 Schiel F (2010): BAStat: new statistical resources at the Bavarian Archive for Speech Signals. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation 2010, La Valletta, p 277.Search in Google Scholar

38 Silbert N, De Jong K (2008): Focus, prosodic context, and phonological feature specification: patterns of variation in fricative production. J Acoust Soc Am 123:2769-2779.10.1121/1.2890736Search in Google Scholar

39 Snoeren N, Hallé P, Segui J (2006): A voice for the voiceless: production and perception of assimilated stops in French. J Phonet 34:241-268.10.1016/j.wocn.2005.06.001Search in Google Scholar

40 Son M, Kochetov A, Pouplier M (2007): The role of gestural overlap in perceptual place assimilation in Korean; in Cole J, Hualde JI (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology IX. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 507-534.Search in Google Scholar

41 Steriade D (1995): Underspecification and markedness; in Goldsmith J (ed): The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Cambridge, Blackwell, pp 114-174.Search in Google Scholar

42 Steriade D (2001): Directional asymmetries in place assimilation: a perceptual account; in Hume E, Johnson K (eds): The Role of Speech Perception in Phonology. San Diego, Academic Press, pp 219-250.Search in Google Scholar

43 Stone M, Faber A, Raphael LJ, Shawker T (1992): Cross-sectional tongue shape and linguopalatal contact patterns in [s], [sh], and [l]. J Phonet 20:253-270.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30626-6Search in Google Scholar

44 Thomson DJ (1982): Spectrum estimation and harmonic analysis. Proc IEEE 70:1055-1096.10.1109/PROC.1982.12433Search in Google Scholar

45 Tiede M, Perkell J, Zandipour M, Matthies M (2001): Gestural timing effects in the ‘perfect memory' sequence observed under three rates by electromagnetometry (abstract). J Acoust Soc Am 110:2657.10.1121/1.4777046Search in Google Scholar

46 Vitevitch MS (2002): The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. J Exp Psychol Learning Mem Cogn 28:735-747.10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.735Search in Google Scholar

47 Wiese R (1996): The Phonology of German. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

48 Zimmerer F, Reetz H, Lahiri A (2009): Place assimilation across words in running speech: corpus analysis and perception. J Acoust Soc Am 125:2307-2322.10.1121/1.3021438Search in Google Scholar

49 Zsiga E (1995): An acoustic and electropalatographic study of lexical and postlexical palatalization in American English; in Connell B, Arvaniti A (eds): Phonology and Phonetic Evidence. Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 282-302.Search in Google Scholar

50 Zsiga E (2006): Assimilation; in Brown K (ed): Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp 553-558.Search in Google Scholar

51 Zsiga E (2011): Local assimilation; in Van Oostendorp M, Rice K, Hume E, Ewen CJ (eds): The Blackwell Companion to Phonology. Hoboken, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 1919-1944.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2015-05-04
Accepted: 2015-11-19
Published Online: 2016-02-09
Published in Print: 2016-03-01

© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel

Downloaded on 2.4.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1159/000442590/html
Scroll to top button