Let me start off with a "I know there isn't just 'how do you do it' questions, that it takes time to learn about Phonetics and Phonology. And I know that its not just something that you can just 'learn' overnight. I am a very committing person; I will stay up and learn what I need to no matter what. And when I do something, I never give up (unless something terrible happens >.>)". With that out of the way, I would like to also add what I have been learning and how/why I came to be learning about them. The reason, if you are interested, can be read in my intro thread as its a bit too long to fit into this post. And now the "Well, what have you've learned of Phonology/Phonetics etc?" which can also be read at my intro thread (I really didn't want this to stretch) Now, hopefully I can voice what I am asking correctly xD

First question:

I am reading both Mark and Pablo's guide to further understand and am stuck around "types of consonants". I understand Place of articulation, its the Degree of closure (voicing, nasalization, aspiration and palatalization) that is confusing me a bit. So my question you ask? Well, aspiration and palatalization, of course. (So if the below is wrong, please -- please -- correct me. I really want to learn). the -* means I don't understand it... . the "<@>" asks the same question as the other two.

Aspiration: Is when a puff of air is released after the sound. Right? Q. can others sounds be aspirated? (I mean, could I make some sounds aspirated?)

Nasalization: when a word (and here is what I am asking about) is pronounced both through the nose as well as the mouth. Q. can others be nasalized too? Not just m, n, and ng? (I mean, could I make some sounds nasalized, or is it restrictive no matter what to those sounds?)

Palatalization: *
Voicing: <@>

End notes:

I know you guys don't have any obligations to help me or even spare the thread a second look, and I wouldn't fault you to ignore me. But I am really stuck. Its probably extremely simply, but I am taking it extremely hard.

So any kind of help given would be great; your version of help (if that so makes sense?), links (not wiki please :<), books, online sites -- anything. It would be really, really be appreciated.

Well, thank you very much for reading and taking the time out of your day to see this,

Karina~

Aspiration is related to voice onset time. When there is a gap between the point at which an obstruent is released and voicing begins on the following sonorant, this is heard as a "puff of air". You can also have "pre-aspiration", where voicing ceases before the closure of a following obstruent. (This is a feature of such languages as Scottish Gaelic and Osage.)

It can be a confusing term because it is often used erroneously. For instance, in the Goidelic languages, "aspiration" is often used to refer to a process which would be better termed "spirantisation", since it involves turning stops into fricatives.


"Nasalisation" usually refers to a secondary articulation where air escapes through the nose as well as the mouth. With nasal stops such as [m], [n], and [ŋ], the mouth is closed; air is escaping only through the nose.

All sonorants can be nasalised. Nasal vowels are common. American English is full of them, but we don't really notice this because they aren't distinctive like they are in French or Gikuyu. Nasalised fricatives are more unusual. They used to exist in Irish, for instance, where [β̃] or [ṽ] was a lenited form of [m]. (Later, the nasalisation was transferred to the preceding vowel and then lost entirely.)

Hi Kaylee. Linguoboy's got it on the first two questions. I'll see if I can lend a hand with the latter two:


Palatalization is similar to nasalization in that it is a secondary articulation, meaning that it is sort of an "add on" that can be applied to most consonant types. It usually involves raising the main part of the tongue upward toward the palatal/alveolar region of the mouth during the articulation of a consonant sound.

In English, palatalization is not emphasized much at all, but, in other languages, palatalization can be used to distinguish different sets of consonant sounds (it would then be referred to as a "phonemic" feature). Irish, for example, distinguishes between palatalized consonants and velarized (tongue raised toward the "vellum"--back of the throat) consonants.


The main thing you need to know with respect to voicing is that, when a sound is voiced, the vocal cords are vibrating. When a sound is voiceless, the vocal cords are not vibrating. A simple way to illustrate: place your hand on your throat and pronounce the letters <s> and <z> (IPA [s] and [z]) one after the other. Feel the vibration? That's voicing.

I hope that cleared up some things for you. Good luck in your studies. Nice to see someone so enthused. ;P

-K

Wow! Thank you guys so much for the help!

@Linguoboy:
Thanks again for the help, Linguoboy. I really appreciate it

*after reading the Wiki article as well*
So Aspiration is the sound between a stop consonant, right...?

And sonorants are vowels? As well as /m/? and I think /l/?

@Kietl:

Thank you for the help, Kietl! :3

The voicing piece really helped me. So if a sound causes the vocal cords to vibrate, they are voiced? And when they aren't vibrating, they are voiceless?

No. Stop consonants can be anything from fully voiced (meaning that the vocal chords start vibrating before you close your lips) to heavily aspirated (meaning there's a sizable gap between the release of the stop and the start of voicing).


No, vowels are sonorants. Nasals (like /[m]) are also sonorants, as are laterals (like [l]) and most rhotics (for instance [r], but not [ʁ]).


Pretty much. When in doubt, hold your finger to your throat. If they're vibrating, you will feel it.

Exactly, although I might not characterize the sound as "causing" the vocal cords to vibrate. Think of a sound as an abstract unit: it may have the feature of voicing (like [z]) or it may not (like [s]).


Here's a simpler way to think about aspiration: put a piece of paper in front of your mouth and say the words "pit" and "spit". For "pit", there should technically be a "puff" of air that makes the paper rustle, although the force can vary between speakers. In contrast, there shouldn't be any puff of air in "spit". This is because the [p] in "pit" is aspirated (a common feature of "stops" at the beginning of a syllable in English), while the [p] in "spit" is unaspirated (a common feature for "stops" when they appear in a consonant cluster, like "sp-").

As Linguoboy noted, the main technical (phonetic) aspect of aspiration is that it delays the beginning of voicing on a following vowel. This is called a delay in Voice Onset Time. Think of it as if you were pronouncing a short [h] after the [p]: [h] is voiceless, so it takes slightly longer for your vocal cords to start vibrating when you shift to the vowel.


A simple definition of sonorant is "a sound which doesn't have a lot of friction". Think of the sound [f]: it's a fricative and there is a good deal of turbulence/friction when you pronounce it. Contrast this with sound like [n], [m], [l], etc., where there is next to no friction.

One interesting aspect of sonorants is that, due to their nature, they are frequently syllabic, e.g. performing the function of vowels. Thus, words like "button" and "little" show syllabic forms of the sonorants [n] and [l] in the final syllable.

In fact, [h] is essentially a voiceless vowel. You can also think of "pit" as [ˈpɪ̥ɪt̚]. The [ɪ̥] is the part that sounds like an [h], the "puff of air" after the release of [p].

Okay, I think I get it now! Again you guys explain it very easily xD

So from what I understand, a sonorant is when there is no restriction/friction like there is /d/ and /z/?

@Kietl:
Is that why "ʰ" represents aspiration?

That's a good, general definition, yes. Technically, the term sonorant is connected to the sonority hierarchy, which ranks the relative amplitude of sounds. If you look at the wave-form of, say, [m] or [l] versus [k] or [f], you'll see that the amplitude of the former sounds is much greater (think of it as "louder") than the latter sounds. This, combined with the general "less friction" definition, yields the classification for sonorants.


Pretty much!


Hmm...I've never seen it described that way, actually! But it certainly makes sense from a functional standpoint. I think, however, that the association of aspiration with the consonant is more in line with phonological observation, since aspiration is generally used to distinguish between consonants (rather than being associated with vowels).

I wonder, though, if any correlation has been noted between vowel length and aspiration? Maybe a "loss" of aspiration ("voicing" of the "voiceless vowel") translating into lengthening of the vowel ? An interesting thought...

Amplitude? I've never heard of amplitude before....Amplitude just means the increase/decrease of the sound/s, right...?