Coalescent assimilation across word-boundaries in American English and in Polish English

• Authors: Kamil Kaźmierski , Ewelina Wojtkowiak , Andreas Baumann
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Coalescent assimilation (CA), where alveolar obstruents /t, d, s, z/ in word-final position merge with word-initial /j/ to produce postalveolar /tʃ, dʒ, ʃ, ʒ/, is one of the most wellknown connected speech processes in English. Due to its commonness, CA has been discussed in numerous textbook descriptions of English pronunciation, and yet, upon comparing them it is difficult to get a clear picture of what factors make its application likely. This paper aims to investigate the application of CA in American English to see a) what factors increase the likelihood of its application for each of the four alveolar obstruents, and b) what is the allophonic realization of plosives /t, d/ if the CA does not apply. To do so, the Buckeye Corpus (Pitt et al. 2007) of spoken American English is analyzed quantitatively. As a second step, these results are compared with Polish English; statistics analogous to the ones listed above for American English are gathered for Polish English based on the PLEC corpus (Pęzik 2012). The last section focuses on what consequences for teaching based on a native speaker model the findings have. It is argued that a description of the phenomenon that reflects the behavior of speakers of American English more accurately than extant textbook accounts could be beneficial to the acquisition of these patterns.

Keywords

EN

casual speech phonology; corpus phonology; foreign language acquisition; coalescent assimilation; glottalization

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 14
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 235-262

Dates

published

2016-09-30

Contributors

author

Kamil Kaźmierski

• Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

author

Ewelina Wojtkowiak

author

Andreas Baumann

• Universität Wien

References

• Avery, P. and S. Ehrlich. 1992. Teaching American English pronunciation. (Oxford handbooks for language teachers). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Batliner, A., Kompe, R., Kiesling, A., Mast, M., Niemann, H. and E. Noth. 1998. M ˆ Syntax + Prosody: A syntactic±}prosodiclabelling scheme for large spontaneous speech databases. Speech Communication 25, 193–222.
• Booth, G. D., Niccolucci, M. J. and E. G. Schuster. 1994. Identifying proxy sets in multiple linear regression: an aid to better coeffi cient interpretation. – US Dept of Agriculture, Forest Service.
• Bowen, J. D. 1975. Patterns of English pronunciation. Rowley: Newbury House.
• Box, G. E. P. and D. R. Cox 1964. An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 26(2). 211–252.
• Bronstein, A. J. 1960. The pronunciation of American English. New York: Appleton-Centruy-Crofts.
• Carr, P. 1999. English phonetics and phonology. An introduction. Malden: Blackwell.
• Christensen, R. H. B. 2015. ordinal - Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 2015, 1-21. Available from: http://www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal/
• Collins, B. and I. M. Mees 2013. Practical phonetics and phonology: A resource book for students. New York: Routledge.
• Cohen, J. 1968. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 70, 213–220.
• Cruttenden, A. 2014. Gimson’s pronunciation of English. London: Routledge.
• Davidson L. 2011. Characteristics of stop releases in American English spontaneous speech. Speech Communication 53, 1042–1058.
• Hyndman R. J. and Y. Khandakar. 2008. Automatic time series forecasting: the forecast package for R. Journal of Statistical Software 26(3), 1–22. Available from: http://ideas.repec.org/a/jss/jstsof/27i03.html
• Jenkins, J. 2000. The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Ladefoged, P. and K. Johnson. 2011. A course in phonetics. [6th edition]. Boston: Wadsworth.
• Pęzik, P. 2012. Towards the PELCRA Learner English Corpus. In P. Pęzik (ed.), Corpus data across languages and disciplines, 33–42. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
• Pitt, M.A., Dilley, L., Johnson, K., Kiesling, S., Raymond, W., Hume, E. and E. Fosler-Lussier. 2007. Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech (2nd release). Columbus, OH: Department of Psychology, Ohio State University.
• Podesva, R. J., Reynolds, J., Callier, P. and J. Baptiste. 2015. Constraints on the social meaning of released /t/: A production and perception study of U.S. politicians. Language Variation and Change 27, 59–87.
• Redi L. and S. Shattuck-Hufnagel. 2001. Variation in the realization of glottalization in normal speakers. Journal of Phonetics 29, 407-429.
• Boersma, P. and D. Weenink. 2016. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.14. Available from http://www.praat.org/ [Accessed:] 11 February 2016.
• Roach, P. 2009. English phonetics and phonology: a practical course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• R Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/
• Shockey, L. 2003. Sound patterns of spoken English. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
• Sloetjes, H. and P. Wittenburg. 2008. Annotation by category - ELAN and ISO DCR. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008).
• Sobkowiak, W. 2001. English phonetics for Poles. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie.
• Venables, W. N. and B. D. Ripley. 2002. Modern Applied Statistics with S. Fourth Edition. Springer, New York. ISBN 0-387-95457-0
• Zsiga, E. C. 2013. The sounds of language. An introduction to phonetics and phonology. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/rela-2016-0012