Quantal phonetics and distinctive features

This paper reviews some of the basic premises of Quantal-Enhancement Theory as developed by K.N. Stevens and his colleagues. Quantal theory seeks to explain why some articulatory and acoustic dimensions are favored over others in distinctive feature contrasts across languages. In this paper, after a review of basic concepts, a protocol for quantal feature definitions is proposed and problems in the interpretation of vowel features are discussed. The quantal basis of distinctive feature Though most linguists and phoneticians agree that the distinctive features of spoken languages are realized in terms of concrete physical and auditory properties, there is little agreement on exactly how they are defined. According to a tradition launched by Jakobson and his collaborators (for example, Jakobson, Fant and Halle 1952), features are defined mainly in the acoustic (or perhaps auditory) domain. In a second tradition initiated by Chomsky and Halle (1968), features are defined primarily in articulatory terms. After several decades of research, these conflicting approaches have not yet led to any widely-accepted synthesis. In recent years, a new initiative has emerged within the framework of the Quantal Theory of speech, developed by K.N. Stevens and his colleagues (e.g. Stevens 1989, 2002, 2005). This theory maintains that the universal set of features is not arbitrary, but can be deduced from the interactions between the articulatory parameters of speech and their acoustic effects. The central claim is that there are phonetic regions in which the relationship between an articulatory configuration and its corresponding acoustic output is not linear. Within such regions, small changes along the articulatory dimension have little effect on the acoustic output. It is such regions of acoustic stability that define the articulatory inventories used in natural languages. In other words, these regions form the basis for a universal set of distinctive features, each of which corresponds to an articulatory-acoustic coupling within which the auditory system is insensitive to small articulatory movements. A simple example of an acoustic-articulatory coupling can be found in the parameter of vocal tract constriction. Degrees of constriction can be ordered along an articulatory continuum extending from a large opening (as in

[1]  B. Lindblom.  Phonetic Universals in Vowel Systems , 1986 .

[2]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  Diverse Acoustic Cues at Consonantal Landmarks , 2000, Phonetica.

[3]  Coarticulation • Suprasegmentals,et al.  Acoustic Phonetics , 2019, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Human Communication Sciences and Disorders.

[4]  B. Granström,et al.  Music and Hearing Quarterly Progress and Status Report Some studies concerning perception of isolated vowels , 2007 .

[5]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  Features in Speech Perception and Lexical Access , 2008 .

[6]  P. Ladefoged,et al.  Fundamental problems in phonetics , 1977 .

[7]  Linda Polka,et al.  Asymmetries in vowel perception , 2003, Speech Commun..

[8]  Marie K. Huffman,et al.  WPP, No. 75: Implementation of Nasal: Timing and Articulatory Landmarks , 1990 .

[9]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  INVARIANCE AND VARIABILITY IN SPEECH: INTERPRETING ACOUSTIC EVIDENCE , 2004 .

[10]  L. Chistovich,et al.  The ‘center of gravity’ effect in vowel spectra and critical distance between the formants: Psychoacoustical study of the perception of vowel-like stimuli , 1979, Hearing Research.

[11]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[12]  J. Schwartz,et al.  The Dispersion-Focalization Theory of vowel systems , 1997 .

[13]  Kenneth N. Stevens,et al.  On the quantal nature of speech , 1972 .

[14]  Kenneth N Stevens,et al.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.