From subtle to gross variation: an Ultrasound Tongue Imaging

study of Dutch and Scottish English /r/

James M Scobbie

Koen Sebregts

Jane Stuart-Smith

Overview: strong onsets, weak codas

• Rhotic consonants have been significant in developing phonetically-detailed theories of syllable-conditioned allophony, and of general phonetic correlates of the syllable (e.g. Krakow 1999).

• American English /r/ (Gick 2003) typifies the subtle low-level behaviour that can be conditioned by various consonants in different syllable roles, and acoustic “stability” (Nieto-Castenon et al., 2005).

• Comparable subtle variation in liquids can be found in other languages (Gick et al. 2005).

However,• /r/ encompasses a far greater articulatory and acoustic range, of far

less subtlety, than has been considered to date. High-level or gross allophony emerges diachronically and exists in variation.– What is the phonetic detail of systems with obvious allophony?– How do abstract phonological categories such as “/r/” and “coda” relate

to phonetic substance? – Can Exemplar Theory or Articulatory Phonology be applied to high-level

phonological phenomena? – There is no “stability” in real language use – speech is socialised

Background Dutch /r/ & Scottish /r/

• Wide phonetic variation in /r/ – Dutch sample of 400 speakers, 10 cities, stratified for sex and age, 22K

• Too many variants to list! Of particular interest, uvular trill onset/ [] coda

– Scottish sample of 32 Glasgow speakers stratified for class, sex and age• older speakers stronger forms[] [] [] []• younger ones [] [] [] [a] etc., [] etc., [] etc.

• Of particular interest: – Onset uvular trill vs. coda post-alveolar approximant– Derhoticising coda, more extreme weakening than US English – Sociolinguistic variation and change

General Method

• Ultrasound Tongue Imaging with synchronised acoustics

• QMUC system (25Hz) with helmet support & Articulate Assistant

• Materials are generally single citation forms

• Dutch subjects (general characteristics excluding intra-subj variation)– Onset and coda both uvular (n=5, only one usable for analysis) VW– Onset uvular trill, coda approximant (n=3) VDB, MS, RB– Onset and coda both post-alveolar approximants (n=1) VDL*– All recorded in Edinburgh, with varied personal histories.– Uvular trills hard to image? Many subjects unusable (n=4)

• Scottish pilot subject – One case of impressionistic derhoticisation (& one rhotic control

speaker)

Summary and conclusions

• Current literature lacks– natural vernacular speech from stratified groups of subjects– phonological onset-coda allophony as well as phonetic ones– an explanation of how abstract phonological patterns arise

• Articulatory analysis of Dutch and Scottish revealed– Speaker whose uvular trill has extra pharyngealisation in coda– Approximant-only speakers who (partially) derhoticise by

• delaying strong rhotic blade gestures pre-pausally• reducing anterior gestures to near zero in faster speech

– Speakers with onset uvular trills and coda anterior approximants• May add pharyngealisation in coda, or it may be present• May add post-alveolar constriction in coda, or it may be present• Tip-up approximant appears less transparently related to trill

• Theoretical relevance for exemplar theory and articulatory pL– Sociolinguistic distributions of acoustics are transformed into

articulations – Acoustic/articulatory relationship must be seen in that context of variation

Onset & coda “the same” 1. Coda uvular trill in VW’s mier has

retracted root (pharyngealisation) after /i/ (also after /u/ & /a/). Coda may be more vocalic, but is notobviously gesturally weaker. Not clear if this is typical.

2. Postalveolar approximant in mier strongly resembles riem (VDL*). It is in timing that onset / coda differ: coda has strong delay in tip raising (see dynamics & acoustics results)

VW

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

riem

mierVW

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

boer

mier

schaar

VWtip right

VDL

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

riem

mier

VDL*

VDB

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

riem

mier

MS

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

riem

mier

RB

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

riem

mier

• RB, tip up, has no posterior difference, coda is stronger

• VDB coda has new pharyngeal gesture, & similar anteriority

• MS coda also new pharyngeal & a stronger post-alveolar

MSVDB

RB

Uvular riem vs. post-alveolar mier

VDL

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

boer

mier

schaar

RB

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

boer

mier

schaar

VDB

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

boer

mier

schaar

MS

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

boer

mier

schaar

MSVDB

VDL* RB

Tip up

Tip down

Approximant codaVariation in target (cf. Delattre & Freeman 1968 etc.)

* VDL has approximant in onset too

0 100 200 300 400

boer

mier

schaar

vowel

trans

rhotic

voiceless

0 100 200 300 400

boer

mier

schaar

vowel

trans

rhotic

voiceless

0 100 200 300 400

boer

mier

schaar

vowel

trans

rhotic

voiceless

0 100 200 300 400

boer

mier

schaar

vowel

trans

rhotic

voiceless

RBVDL*

MSVDB

Acoustic Dynamics• VDB is taken as an average baseline

• VDL* has longer “transition” and little steady state

• RB has longer vowel and little steady state

• MS has longer steady state

300 350 400 450 500 550

100

150

200

250

300

350

300 350 400 450 500 550

150

200

250

300

350

60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

300 350 400 450 500 550

150

200

250

300

350

RBVDL*

MSVDB

Articulatory Dynamics• VDL* has clear, late, tongue tip raising (examples of /ur/)

• A pharyngeal constriction tends to precede coronal one

Auditory analysis of Dutch…• VDL* sounds highly derhoticised, especially after /a/

(same as Plug & Ogden 2002 & cf. transcriber variation)

• Other speakers sound rhotic but vary greatly in dynamics

• something else

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

CT JSS RL

transcriber

no

. of

toke

ns

Vh

V

V^

r

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

CT JSS RLtranscriber

no. o

f tok

ens

2M

02468

1012141618

CT JSS RLtranscriber3M

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

CT JSS RLtranscr iber4M

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

CT JSS RLtranscriber

no

. of

toke

ns

1M

…and Scottish

• Stuart-Smith (2003, 2006) reveals derhoticisation of vernacular Scottish

• Weakened /r/ prevalent but phonetically variable

• No phonological changeConclusion

how we sound varies… & matters in sociolinguistic

variation and change

Acoustic analysis• F2 & F3 at mid vowel, transition & rhotic (if present)

• After /a/ VDL* is derhoticised (F2 1531Hz, F3 2616Hz)

• After /i/ and /u/, VDL* also has less approximated F3/F2 (>850Hz) than other speakers (<450Hz)

VDL boer

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

/ur/ F2 F3

VDB 1600 1923

RB 1491 1905

MS 1760 1816

VDL* 1344 2209

/ir/ F2 F3

VDB 1668 2051

RB 1864 2211

MS 1825 1987

VDL* 1769 2710

VDL m ier

0

5001000

15002000

25003000

3500

V T R

VDL schaar

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

RB schaar

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

VDB schaar

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

MS schaar

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

V T R

bot

bord

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

V T R

bot

bord

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

V T R

bot

bord

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

V T R

bot

bord

RBVDL*

MSVDB

Contrast before stops• VDL* retains contrast before stops

• This is the context examined by Plug & Ogden (2002)

• Gestural pattern of tongue blade strongly differs

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

V T R

kaas

kaars

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

kaas

kaars

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

kaas

kaars

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

V T R

kaas

kaars

RBVDL*

MSVDB

Contrast before fricatives• VDL* more non-rhotic in vowel portion

• Contrast appears to be cued by fricative

• Articulatorily /rs/ has a curving retracted approach

Late tip raising by VDL* • Acoustic and impressionistic derhoticisation in prepausal

or list medial position is achieved by delay of anterior gesture past the end of voicing.

•

• In fast/casual speech, for a word-final /r/– Before a word-initial consonant, tip raising is greatly weakened.

– Before a word-initial vowel, /r/ acts more like an onset – tapped

Pilot Scottish derhoticising speaker• Onset is strongly rhotic, ambisyllabic is tap, coda is ???

• Low vowels sound derhoticised, and acoustically lack F2/F3 approximation. (Cf. rhotic Scot)

• Articulatorily, gesture retained (cf. VDL*)

car

car