The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Incomplete Laryngeal Neutralisation in KL Malay Husni Abu Bakar Karthik Durvasula Nadya Pincus Tim McKinnon (University of Delaware) 1

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

What is Laryngeal Neutralisation? UR SR /kə+wujod+an/ [kəwujodan]

Meaning ‘materialisation’

/wujod/

[wujot]

‘shape’

/mulot/

[mulot]

‘mouth’

2

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

What is Laryngeal Neutralisation? Simple Generalised Rule/Process: [+voice] [-son] [-cont] {b,d,g}




[-voice] / ___ # (similar to Teoh (1994))

{p,t,k}

3

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Why is it interesting?  



Many languages have ‘laryngeal neutralisations’. Phonetic studies of laryngeal neutralisation (or devoicing) in Afrikaans, Catalan, German, Polish, Russian… (Dinnsen & Charles-Luce (1984), Port & Crawford (1989), Van Rooy, Wissing &Paschall (2003)). Some phonetic differences do exist between the ‘devoiced’ and ‘underlyingly’ voiceless segments. 4

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Our Question Is the laryngeal neutralisation (devoicing) in KL Malay complete or only partial? For e.g., At the end of a word, does /b/ surface as [p] Or does /b/ surface as something like [p], but not exactly [p] 5

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1    

  

Attempt: Materials

2 speakers 16 test items – 4 targets + 12 fillers 2 carrier phrases 3 repetitions of each test item in each carrier phrase. Recorded on a Dell 6500 Inspiron laptop. Sampling rate – 44 KHz. Recorded on Audacity & analysed using Praat (Boersma & Weenink 2005). 6

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Materials

Target Words Coronal

Labial

Final Voiceless Consonant

/mulot/ ‘mouth

/kəlep/ ‘blink’

Final Voiced Consonant

/wujod/ ‘shape’

/saleb/ ‘crucifix’ 7

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Materials

Carrier Phrases 1. aku tak cakap ________ lagi. ‘I did not say ________ yet.’ 2.

aku tak cakap ________ tadi. ‘I did not say ________ just now.’

8

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

1st Attempt: Definitions of Variables 

Length of preceding vowel The interval from a sudden increase in amplitude ( last zero crossing in the waveform before the start of periodicity of the vowel ) to a sudden drop in the amplitude (the zero crossing of the waveform immediately after such a drop in amplitude). 9

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Length of preceding vowel

Extract from ‘aku tak cakap saleb tadi’ 10

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

1st Attempt: Definitions of Variables 

Consonant Closure The interval between the sudden drop in amplitude after the vowel preceding the test consonant and the release of the following onset consonant.

11

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Consonant Closure

Extract from ‘aku tak cakap saleb tadi’ 12

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

  

Attempt: Final Measures

Average Vowel Length (msec) Average Consonant Closure (lagi) – lagi context Average Consonant Closure (tadi) – tadi context

13

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

1st Attempt: Expectations 

If it is not total neutralisation. a. Vowel length may be more with voiced consonant of the same place of articulation (POA). b. Consonant Closure (CC) may be more for the voiceless consonant of the same POA.

Note: two CC’s – CC with lagi; CC with tadi. 14

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

Speaker 1: a. Vowel length is different with coronals.

15

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

Coronal

Labial

Voiceless

77.55

81.95

Voiced

91.83

81.52

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length (in msec) 16

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1) Speaker 1: Preceding Vowel Length

Vowel length (msec)

120 100 80 Voiceless

60

Voiced

40 20 0 Coronal

Labial Following C Place

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length 17

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

Speaker 1: a. Vowel length is different with coronals. b. Consonant Closure (CC) for voiceless bilabials is consistently longer than voiced bilabials.

18

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

C#lagi

C#tadi

Voiceless

86.1

102.3

Voiced

75.26

92.77

Consonant Closure in Labials (in msec) 19

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1) Speaker 1: CC with Labials

CC length (msec)

120 100 80 Voiceless

60

Voiced

40 20 0 C#lagi

C#tadi Context

Consonant Closure in Labials 20

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

Speaker 1: a. Vowel length is different with coronals. b. Consonant Closure (CC) for voiceless bilabials is consistently longer than voiced bilabials. c. The CC of coronals consonants are inconsistent.

21

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1)

C#lagi

C#tadi

Voiceless

58.8

87.4

Voiced

75.33

80.4

Consonant Closure in Coronals (in msec) 22

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 1) Speaker 1: CC with Coronals

CC length (msec)

100 80 60

Voiceless

40

Voiced

20 0 C#lagi

C#tadi Context

Consonant Closure in Coronals 23

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

Speaker 2: a. Labials show the expected trend with preceding vowel length; with coronals it is unclear.

24

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

Coronal

Labial

Voiceless

72

66

Voiced

69.4

76.4

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length (in msec) 25

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2) Speaker 2: Preceding Vowel Length

Vowel length (msec)

100 80 60

Voiceless

40

Voiced

20 0 Coronal

Labial Following C POA

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length 26

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

Speaker 2: a. Labials show the expected trend with preceding vowel length; with coronals it is unclear. b. Labials show the expected trend with CC length. (one token - saleb#tadi – discarded because of an uncharacteristic pause)

27

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

C#lagi

C#tadi

Voiceless

92.2

97

Voiced

83

68.5

Consonant Closure in Labials (in msec) 28

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2) Speaker 2: CC with Labials

CC length (msec)

140 120 100 80

Voiceless

60

Voiced

40 20 0 C#lagi

C#tadi Context

Consonant Closure in Labials 29

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1 

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

Speaker 2: a. Labials show the expected trend with preceding vowel length; with coronals it is unclear. b. Labials show the expected trend with CC length. (one token - saleb#tadi – discarded because of an uncharacteristic pause) c. Coronals do not show the expected trend with CC length. (However, no observable [t] in the spectrogram in the lagi context. Therefore, this case cannot be compared with the voiced consonant.) 30

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2)

C#lagi

C#tadi

Voiceless

59.63

73

Voiced

86.33

81.667

Consonant Closure in Coronals (in msec) 31

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

st 1

Attempt: Results (Speaker 2) Speaker 2: CC with Coronals

CC length (msec)

120 100 80 Voiceless

60

Voiced

40 20 0 C#lagi

C#tadi Context

Consonant Closure in Coronals 32

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2      

Attempt: Materials

2 speakers 16 test items – 4 target + 12 fillers 3 carrier phrases Recorded on a Dell 6500 Inspiron laptop. Sampling rate – 44 KHz. Recorded on Audacity & analysed using Praat (Boersma & Weenink 2005). 33

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

2nd Attempt: Materials 

Carrier Phrases 1. aku tak cakap ________ lagi. ‘I did not say ________ yet.’ 2. aku tak cakap ________ tadi. ‘I did not say ________ just now.’ 3. aku tak cakap ________ dulu. ‘I did not say ________ before.’

34

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2 

Attempt

The only dependent variable we measured was length of the vowel preceding the target consonants.

35

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2 

Attempt: Results

Both speaker 3 and speaker 4 did not contradict the expected direction of variation.

36

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2

Attempt: Results (Speaker 3)

Coronal

Labial

Voiceless

105.33

83.28

Voiced

104.33

96.76

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length (in msec) 37

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2

Attempt: Results (Speaker 3) Speaker 3

Vowel Length (msec)

120 100 80 Voiceless

60

Voiced

40 20 0 Coronal

Bilabial Following C Place

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length 38

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2

Attempt: Results (Speaker 4)

Coronal

Labial

Voiceless

71.5

62.5

Voiced

78.33

68.5

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length (in msec) 39

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

nd 2

Attempt: Results (Speaker 4)

Vowel Length (msec)

Speaker 4 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Voiceless Voiced

Coronal

Bilabial Following C Place

Effect of the following Consonant on Vowel Length 40

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Final Observations 



Final voiced and voiceless bilabials, when do show a difference in the means of the measures, it is in the expected direction. Final voiced and voiceless coronals are a lot more inconsistent. Possible Explanation: there is another independent variable for coronals? Alveolar [d] vs. dental [t] which is not being neutralised. 41

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

Conclusion 

There is some reason to believe that the final devoicing in KL Malay may not be a ‘simple rule / process’. 



This raises the bigger question: If it is not a simple rule of devoicing, then what exactly is happening and how is it to be accounted for?

A more extensive experiment is needed to confirm the statistical significance of the observed disparities. 42

The 11th ISMIL, 6th August, 2007.

References Boersma, Paul & David Weenink (2005): Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version4.5.24) [computer program]. Retrieved April 28, 2007, from http://www.praat.org/ Dinnsen, D. & Chares-Luce, J. (1984). Phonological neutralisation, phonetic implementation and individual differences. Journal of Phonetics 12, 49-60. Port, R. & Crawford, P. (1989). Incomplete neutralization and pragmatics in German. Journal of Phonetics 17, 257-282. Teoh, Boon Seong (1994). The Sound System of Malay Revisited. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Van Rooy, Bertus, Daan Wissing, & Dwayne D. Paschall (2003). Demystifying incomplete neutralization during final devoicing. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 21 (1&2), 49-66.

43