Variation in the articulation of Russian stressed vowels and the mechanics of palatalization in consonants

Małgorzata E Cavar,Steven M Lulich

doi:10.3765/pda.v3art3.31

Abstract

A 3D/4D ultrasound study of Russian stressed vowels in the context of ‘soft’ (phonetically palatalized or palatal) versus ‘hard’ consonants reveals that vowels in these two contexts differ systematically in terms of the position of the tongue root while the tongue dorsum is less consistently modified depending on the speaker, vowel or consonant context. This paper proposes that the observed vowel allophony, as well as the softness contrast in Russian consonants, and the contrast between front and central high vowels, are all defined in terms of the feature [ATR].

Highlights

This article reports on the results of a 3D/4D ultrasound study of Russian stressed vowels and documents the variation in the realization of the vowels triggered by the context of palatalized as opposed to nonpalatalized consonants
When interpreted within the context of palatalization in Russian phonology, we propose that the phonetic data supports an analysis in which the palatalization feature is [ATR]
In this paper we examined different phonetic correlates of Russian vowel allophony triggered by soft consonants

Summary

Introduction

This article reports on the results of a 3D/4D ultrasound study of Russian stressed vowels and documents the variation in the realization of the vowels triggered by the context of palatalized (soft) as opposed to nonpalatalized (hard) consonants. We argue that vowels in the soft-hard consonant contexts differ systematically in the position of the tongue root and less systematically in terms of the fronting or raising of the tongue dorsum. While our analysis is couched within the feature geometry framework (Clements 1985; Halle 1995; Clements & Hume 1995), the basic point of the paper is to acknowledge the role of the tongue root in secondary palatalization processes This insight refers to physical facts and is largely independent of the theoretical framework we choose to adopt. Hamilton (1980: 28ff), Swan (2011: 40ff), Jones & Ward (1969: 33, 41–44, 193), and Timberlake (2004: 39) all report that soft-consonant-context (SCC) vowels are fronted, raised, or both fronted and raised in comparison to the hard-consonant-context (HCC) vowels. These differences are clearly visible, for example, on X-ray images in Koneczna & Zawadowski

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion