Quantity-related variation of duration, pitch and vowel quality in spontaneous Estonian

Abstract The three-way distinction of the Estonian quantity is a feature of the primary stressed disyllabic foot. The quantity degrees are realized by different temporal patterns of the segments within the foot. Additionally, other phonetic features appear to vary depending on the quantity, such as pitch contour and vowel quality. In this paper, the quantity-related variation of segment duration, pitch, and vowel quality was investigated in spontaneous Estonian in words occurring in sentence-medial position. While a disyllabic foot can be made up of a number of segmental combinations, the data showed that the quantity opposition operates independently of the segmental structure of the foot. The effect of the analyzed features was evaluated with a multinomial logistic regression model. The model showed that all the variables which were included had a significant effect. Besides the inverse relation of the stressed and unstressed syllable rhymes, which is traditionally used to describe the three-way opposition, syllable onset duration also had a weak effect. Additionally, vowel quality was significant for the opposition of short (Q1) and long (Q2), and pitch alignment was significant for the opposition of long (Q2) and overlong (Q3) quantities.

[1]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  Phonetic tone signals phonological quantity and word structure. , 2010, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  Bert Remijsen,et al.  Why are three-level vowel length systems rare? Insights from Dinka (Luanyjang dialect) , 2008, J. Phonetics.

[3]  B. Lindblom,et al.  Numerical Simulation of Vowel Quality Systems: The Role of Perceptual Contrast , 1972 .

[4]  Van Haitsma,et al.  A hierarchical sketch of Mixe as spoken in San José El Paraíso , 1976 .

[5]  F. Nolan.  Intonational equivalence : an experimental evaluation of pitch scales , 2003 .

[6]  Lya Meister,et al.  Perception of the short vs. long phonological category in Estonian by native and non-native listeners , 2011, J. Phonetics.

[7]  Amalia Arvaniti,et al.  Rhythm, Timing and the Timing of Rhythm , 2009, Phonetica.

[8]  Searle Hoogshagen.  Three Contrastive Vowel Lengths in Mixe , 1959 .

[9]  Elmar Ternes,et al.  The phonemic analysis of Scottish Gaelic: Based on the dialect of Applecross, Ross-shire , 1973 .

[10]  Francis Nolan,et al.  The Pairwise Variability Index and Coexisting Rhythms in Language , 2009, Phonetica.

[11]  Pärtel Lippus,et al.  The tonal component of Estonian quantity in native and non-native perception , 2009, J. Phonetics.

[12]  Ilse Lehiste,et al.  Discrimination of duration ratios by native English and Estonian listeners , 1987 .

[13]  Ilse Lehiste,et al.  Influence of fundamental frequency pattern on the perception of duration , 1976 .

[14]  Hartmut Traunmüller,et al.  The Effect of Local Speaking Rate on the Perception of Quantity in Estonian , 2003, Phonetica.

[15]  Mariapaola D'Imperio,et al.  Tonal effects on perceived vowel duration , 2010 .

[16]  Lya Meister,et al.  Short vs. Long Category Perception Affected by Vowel Quality , 2011, ICPhS.

[17]  Jonathan Harrington,et al.  Phonetic Analysis of Speech Corpora , 2010 .

[18]  Pärtel Lippus,et al.  The Role of Pitch Cue in the Perception of the Estonian Long Quantity , 2011 .

[19]  Ilse Lehiste,et al.  Discrimination of duration ratios in Estonian and English , 1987 .

[20]  K. D. Thomas.  Vowel length and pitch in Yavapai , 1990 .

[21]  S. Werner.  Duration Affects Vowel Perception in Estonian and Finnish , 2009 .

[22]  H. Traunmüller.  Analytical expressions for the tonotopic sensory scale , 1990 .

[23]  Eva Liina Asu,et al.  THE EFFECT OF INTONATION ON PITCH CUES TO THE ESTONIAN QUANTITY CONTRAST , 1999 .

[24]  Torben Andersen.  The Phonemic System of Agar Dinka , 1987 .

[25]  Martti Vainio,et al.  Real-Time Correlates of Phonological Quantity Reveal Unity of Tonal and Non-Tonal Languages , 2010, PloS one.

[26]  Heike Lehnert-LeHouillier,et al.  A cross-linguistic investigation of cues to vowel length perception , 2010, J. Phonetics.

[27]  Patrik Bye,et al.  Phonetic Duration, Phonological Quantity and Prosodic Structure in Inari Saami , 2010, Phonetica.

[28]  Pärtel Lippus,et al.  Has Estonian Quantity System Changed in a Century? Comparison of Historical and Contemporary Data , 2011, ICPhS.

[29]  Pärtel Lippus.  Variation in Vowel Quality as a Feature of Estonian Quantity , 2010 .

[30]  Maike Prehn,et al.  Vowel quantity and the fortis-lenis distinction in North Low Saxon , 2012 .

[31]  A. Yu.  Tonal effects on perceived vowel duration , 2006 .

[32]  Mareike Plüschke,et al.  Peak Alignment in Falling Accents in Estonian , 2011, ICPhS.

[33]  Zita McRobbie-Utasi.  The instability of systems with ternary length distinctions: The Skolt Saami evidence , 2007 .

[34]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer , 2002 .

[35]  Pire Teras,et al.  Illustrations of the IPA: Estonian , 2009 .

[36]  Douglas G. Danforth,et al.  Foneettisten vihjeiden hierarkia viron kvantiteetin havaitsemisessa , 1977 .

[37]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat: doing phonetics by computer , 2003 .

[38]  Elena Markus,et al.  The Phonetics and Phonology of a Disyllabic Foot in Soikkola Ingrian , 2011 .

[39]  B. Remijsen,et al.  Shilluk , 2011, Journal of the International Phonetic Association.

[40]  Francis Nolan,et al.  The Analysis of Low Accentuation in Estonian , 2007, Language and speech.

[41]  Ilse Lehiste,et al.  Prosodic change in progress: from quantity language to accent language , 2003 .