Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T08:55:52.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An acoustic study of quasi-phonemic vowels in Ampenan Sasak

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2021

Leah Pappas Open the ORCID record for Leah Pappas [Opens in a new window]
Leah Pappas*
Affiliation:
The University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa lpappas@hawaii.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a variety of Sasak called Ampenan Sasak in this paper, traditional documentation and analytical methods based on auditory perception reveal allophonic patterns in alternations of height among mid-vowels. High mid-vowels occur in final syllables ending in [ʔ] or no-coda (e.g. [tokoʔ] ‘fish species native to Lombok’) while low mid-vowels occur in final syllables ending in all other consonants (e.g. [tɔkɔl] ‘to sit’). However, words deviate from these patterns in several minimal pairs (e.g. [bəɾəmbok] ‘to discuss’ and [bəɾəmbɔk] ‘to breathe’) and in some borrowings (e.g. [agostos] ‘August’), suggesting a quasi-phonemic status for back mid-vowels; they behave like both phonemes and allophones. This study analyzes the phonetic properties of mid-vowels through an acoustic analysis of the F1 and F2 of 2,448 vowel tokens. Results suggest that mid-vowels are largely predictable among non-borrowed vocabulary. In final syllables, syllable openness serves as a predictor for the height of mid-vowels. In pre-final syllables, syllable openness has no effect on the height of the vowel. Rather, the height of pre-final mid-vowels is predictable based on the height of the final-syllable vowel. In consideration of both elicitation and acoustic evidence, this paper adopts a descriptive approach by stating that Ampenan Sasak back mid-vowels are largely predictable, with some exceptions. Further, the paper questions whether all sounds must be identified as a ‘phoneme’ or an ‘allophone’ and argues that quasi-phonemic segments are a valuable intermediate descriptor for both phonological theory and language documentation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , April 2023 , pp. 47 - 68
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the International Phonetic Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adank, Patti, Smits, Roel & van Hout, Roeland. 2004. A comparison of vowel normalization procedures for language variation research. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 116, 137–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adelaar, K. Alexander. 2005. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: A historical perspective. In Alexander Adelaar, K. & Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. (eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, 1–42. London: Routlege.Google Scholar
Adisasmito-Smith, Niken. 1999. Influence of Javanese vowel patterning on Indonesian: An acoustic investigation. 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPHS XIV), San Francisco, CA, 1109–1112.Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana, Tanashur, Panji & Yip, Jonathan. 2018. Sasak, Meno-mené dialect. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 50(1), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archangeli, Diana, Yip, Jonathan, Qin, Lang & Lee, Albert. 2017. Phonological and phonetic properties of nasal substitution in Sasak and Javanese. Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology 8(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, Peter K. 2012. Tense, aspect, mood and evidentiality in Sasak, eastern Indonesia. Proceedings of the International Workshop on TAM and Evidentiality in Indonesian Languages, Tokyo, Japan, 121–135.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter K. & Julia, Sallabank. 2010. The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barr, Dale J., Roger, Levy, Christoph, Scheepers & Tily, Harry J.. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68, 255–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, Douglas, Mächler, Martin, Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve. 2014. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4 . Journal of Statistical Software 1–51.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David, Weenink. 2019. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 6.1.02.Google Scholar
Chahal, Dana. 1998. An acoustic phonetic analysis of Sasak vowels. Working Papers in Sasak 1, 25–22.Google Scholar
Djenar, Dwi Noverini, Ewing, Michael & Manns, Howard. 2018. Style and intersubjectivity in youth interaction, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, David M., Simons, Gary F. & Fennig, Charles D.. 2019. Ethnologue: Languages of the world, 22nd edn. https://www.ethnologue.com/.Google Scholar
Goedemans, Rob W. N. & Ellen, van Zanten. 2007. Stress and accent in Indonesian. LOT Occasional Series 9, 35–62.Google Scholar
Goeemans, Rob W. N. & Ellen, van Zanten. 2014. No stress typology. In Johanneke, Caspers, Yiya, Chen, Willemijn, Heeren, Jos, Pacilly, Schiller, Niels O. & Ellen, van Zanten (eds). Above and beyond the segments: Experimental linguistics and phonetics, 83–95. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Goldinger, Stephen D. 1998. Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review 105, 251–279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldsmith, John A. 1995. Phonological theory. In Goldsmith, John A. (eds). The handbook of phonological theory, 1–23. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hall, Kathleen Currie. 2009. A probabilistic model of phonological relationships from contrast to allophony. Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Hall, Kathleen Currie. 2012. Phonological relationships: A probabilistic model. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics 22, 1–14.Google Scholar
Hall, Kathleen Currie. 2013. A typology of intermediate phonological relationships. The Linguistic Review 30, 215–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1977. Tenseness, vowel shift, and the phonology of the back vowels in Modern English. Linguistic Inquiry 8, 611–625.Google Scholar
Hill, Kenneth C. 1998. Review of Registro de la veración fonológica en el Náhuatl Moderno: Un estudio de caso by Cristina Monzón. International Journal of American Linguistics 64, 70–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio. 2005. Quasi-phonemic contrasts in Spanish. Proceedings of the 23rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 23), 374–398.Google Scholar
Jacq, Pascale. 1998. How many dialects are there. Working Papers in Sasak 1, 67–69.Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 2005. Speaker normalization in speech perception. In Pisoni, David B. & Remez, Robert E. (eds.), The handbook of speech perception, 363–398. Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaland, Constantijn, Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Kluge, Angela. 2019. Stress predictors in a Papuan Malay random forest. Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhSXIX), Melbourne, 2871–2875.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn. 1963. Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 35(11), 1773–1781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2002. Phonetics in the field. The Twenty-eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 28), 28(1), 411–429.Google Scholar
Maskikit-Essed, Raechel & Carlos, Gussenhoven. 2016. No stress, no pitch accent, no prosodic focus: The case of Ambonese Malay. Phonology 33(2), 353–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloy, Daniel R. 2016. phonR: Tools for phoneticians and phonologists. Rpackage version 1.0.7.Google Scholar
McDonnell, Bradley. 2016. Acoustic correlates of stress in Besemah. In Yanti & Timothy McKinnon (eds.), Studies in language typology and change (NUSA 60), 1–28.Google Scholar
Moon, Seung-Jae & Björn, Lindblom. 1994. Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 96, 40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, James Tomlinson. 1993. A processing model of phonological rule application. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carole. 1986. Phonologie et morphologie lexicales: Les classes nominales en Peul (Fula). Ph.D dissertation, Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Scobbie, James M. & Jane, Stuart-Smith. 2008. Quasi-phonemic contrast and the indeterminacy of the segmental inventory: Examples from Scottish English. In Avery, Peter B., Elan, Dresher & Keren, Rice (eds.). Contrast in phonology: Perception and acquisition, 87–114. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smolensky, Paul & Matthew, Goldrick. 2016. Gradient symbolic representations in grammar: The case of French liaison. Rutgers Optimality Archive 1552.Google Scholar
Staff, Nell F. 1995. Dictionary of the Sasak language of Lombok, with Indonesian and English. Mataram, Lombok: Mataram University Press.Google Scholar
Teeuw, Andries. 1958. Lombok, een dialect-geografische studie [Lombok, a dialect-geographic study]. Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhof.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoir, Nazir. 1985. Kamus Sasak-Indonesia [Sasak–Indonesian dictionary]. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.Google Scholar
Thoir, Nazir, Reoni, Ketut & Ketut Karyawan, I.. 1985–1986. Tata bahasa bahasa Sasak [A grammar of the Sasak language]. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa.Google Scholar
Turk, Alice, Nakai, Satsuki & Sugahara, Mariko. 2006. Acoustic segment durations in prosodic research: A practical guide. In Stefan Sudhoff, Denisa Lenertova, Roland Meyer, Sandra Pappert, Petra Augurzky, Ina Mleinek, Nicole Richter & Johannes Schließer (eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research, vol. 3, 1–28. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wood, Sidney. 1975. Tense and lax vowels: Degree of construction or pharyngeal volume? Working Papers Lund University 11, 109–134.Google Scholar