Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T07:42:59.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonetic structure in Yoloxóchitl Mixtec consonants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2019

Christian T. DiCanio Open the ORCID record for Christian T. DiCanio [Opens in a new window] ,
Caicai Zhang ,
Douglas H. Whalen  and
Rey Castillo García
Christian T. DiCanio
Affiliation:
University at Buffalo & Haskins Laboratoriescdicanio@buffalo.edu
Caicai Zhang
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Polytechnic Universitycaicai.zhang@polyu.edu.hk
Douglas H. Whalen
Affiliation:
Haskins Laboratories & CUNY Graduate Centerwhalen@haskins.yale.edu
Rey Castillo García
Affiliation:
Secretaria de educación pública, Guerrero (Mexico)reyyoloxochitl@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While Mixtec languages are well-known for their tonal systems, there remains relatively little work focusing on their consonant inventories. This paper provides an in-depth phonetic description of the consonant system of the Yoloxóchitl Mixtec language (Oto-Manguean, ISO 639-3 code xty), a Guerrero Mixtec variety. The language possesses a number of contrasts common among Mixtec languages, such as voiceless unaspirated stops, prenasalized stops, and a strong tendency for words to conform to a minimally bimoraic structure. Using a controlled set of data, we focus on how word size and word position influence the acoustic properties of different consonant types. We examine closure duration, VOT, and formant transitions with the stop series, spectral moments with the fricative series, the timing between oral and nasal closure with the prenasalized stop series, and both formant transitions and qualitative variability with the glide series. The general effect of word size is discussed in relation to work on polysyllabic shortening (Turk & Shattuck-Hufnagel 2000) and demonstrates the importance of prosodic templates in Mixtec languages (Macken & Salmons 1997). The prenasalized stop data provides evidence that such stops are best analyzed as allophones of nasal consonants preceding oral vowels (as per Marlett 1992) and not as hypervoiced variants of voiced stops (as per Iverson & Salmons 1996).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Phonetic Association , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , December 2020 , pp. 333 - 365
Check for updates
Copyright
© International Phonetic Association 2019

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

Abramson, Arthur S. & Whalen, Douglas H.. 2017. Voice Onset Time (VOT) at 50: Theoretical and practical issues in measuring voicing distinctions. Journal of Phonetics 63, 75–86.Google Scholar
Adams, James N. 2007. The regional diversification of Latin 200 BC – AD 600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amith, Jonathan D. & García, Rey Castillo. No date. Corpus and lexicon development: Endangered genres of discourse and domains of cultural knowledge in Tu’un ísaví (Mixtec) of Yoloxóchitl, Guerrero. Jonathan D. Amith Yoloxóchitl Mixtec collection. Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America: www.ailla.utexas.org. Media: audio, text. Access public.Google Scholar
Babel, Molly. 2009. Phonetic and social selectivity in speech accommodation . Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Beddor, Patricia S. & Onsuwan, Chutamanee. 2003. Perception of prenasalized stops. In Solé, Maria Josep, Recasens, Daniel & Romero, Joaquín (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS XV), 407–410. Barcelona: Causal Productions.Google Scholar
Blevins, Juliette. 2004. Evolutionary phonology: The emergence of sound patterns . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2016. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [computer program]. Version 6.0.21. http://www.praat.org.Google Scholar
Bourhis, Richard Y. & Giles, Howard. 1977. The language of intergroup distinctiveness. In Giles, Howard (ed.), Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations , 11–136. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, C. Henry. 1970. A linguistic sketch of Jicaltepec Mixtec (Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields 25). Norman, OK: Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Oklahoma.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine P. & Goldstein, Louis M.. 1986. Towards an articulatory phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3, 219–252.Google Scholar
Bye, Patrick. 2011. Dissimilation. In van Oostendorp, Marc, Ewen, Colin & Hume, Elizabeth (eds.), The Blackwell companion to phonology , 1408–1433. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Castillo García, Rey. 2007. Descripción fonológica, segmental, y tonal del Mixteco de Yoloxóchitl, Guerrero [Phonological, segmental, and tonal description of the Mixtec language of Yoloxóchito, Guerrero]. Master’s thesis, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (CIESAS), México, D.F.Google Scholar
Cho, Taehong & Ladefoged, Peter. 1999. Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics 27, 207–229.Google Scholar
Cohn, Abigail C. & Riehl, Anastasia K.. 2008. The internal structure of nasal–stop sequences: Evidence from Austronesian. Presented at the 11th Conference on Laboratory Phonology, Wellington, NZ.Google Scholar
Davidson, Lisa. 2016. Variability in the implementation of voicing in American English obstruents. Journal of Phonetics 54, 35–50.Google Scholar
de Alvarado, Fray Francisco. 1593. Vocabulario en Lengua Mixteca Hecho por los Padres de la Orden de Predicadores [Vocabulary of the Mixtec language made by the Order of Preachers (Dominican Order)] (reprint, 1962). México, D.F.: Instituto Nacional Indígena e Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.Google Scholar
de Los Reyes, Fray Antonio. 1593. Arte en Lengua Mixteca [The art of the Mixtec language]. Casa de Pedro Balli, Mexico: Comte H. de Charencey edition.Google Scholar
Delattre, Pierre. 1968. From acoustic cues to distinctive features. Phonetica 18, 198–230.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian T. 2010. Illustrations of the IPA: San Martín Itunyoso Trique. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 40(2), 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiCanio, Christian T. 2012. The phonetics of fortis and lenis consonants in Itunyoso Trique. International Journal of American Linguistics 78(2), 239–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiCanio, Christian T., Amith, Jonathan & García, Rey Castillo. 2012. Phonetic alignment in Yoloxóchitl Mixtec tone. Presented at the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas Annual Meeting, Portland, OR.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian [T.], Amith, Jonathan & García, Rey Castillo. 2014. The phonetics of moraic alignment in Yoloxóchitl Mixtec. Proceedings of the 4th Tonal Aspects of Language Symposium , Nijmegen, the Netherlands, 203–210.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian [T.], Benn, Joshua & García, Castillo, , R. 2018. The phonetics of information structure in Yoloxóchitl Mixtec. Journal of Phonetics 68, 50–68.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian [T.], Chen, Wei-Rong, Benn, Joshua, Amith, Jonathan D. & García, Rey Castillo. 2017. Automatic detection of extreme stop allophony in Mixtec spontaneous speech. Presented at the 5th Annual Meeting in Phonology, New York University.Google Scholar
DiCanio, Christian [T.], Nam, Hosung, Amith, Jonathan D., García, Rey Castillo & Whalen, Douglas H.. 2015. Vowel variability in elicited versus spontaneous speech: Evidence from Mixtec. Journal of Phonetics 48, 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Laura J. 2005. On the ambiguous segmental status of nasals in homorganic NC sequences. In van Oostendorp, Marc & van de Weijer, Jeroen M. (eds.), The internal organization of phonological segments , 219–252. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Drager, Katie, Hay, Jennifer & Walker, Abby. 2010. Pronounced rivalries: Attitudes and speech production. Te Reo 53, 27–53.Google Scholar
Gay, Thomas. 1981. Mechanisms of control in speech rate. Phonetica 38, 148–158.Google ScholarPubMed
Gerfen, Chip. 2001. Nasalized fricatives in Coatzospan Mixtec. International Journal of American Linguistics 67(4), 449–466.Google Scholar
Gerfen, Chip & Baker, Kirk. 2005. The production and perception of laryngealized vowels in Coatzospan Mixtec. Journal of Phonetics 33, 311–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerfen, Henry J. 1996. Topics in the phonology and phonetics of Coatzospan Mixtec . Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew, Barthmaier, Paul & Sands, Kathy. 2002. A cross-linguistic acoustic study of voiceless fricatives. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 32(2), 141–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, Matthew, Munro, Pamela & Ladefoged, Peter. 2000. Some phonetic structures of Chickasaw. Anthropological Linguistics 42, 366–400.Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew, Potter, Brian, Dawson, John, de Reuse, Willem & Ladefoged, Peter. 2001. Phonetic structures of Western Apache. International Journal of American Linguistics 67(4), 415–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrera Zendejas, Esther. 2009. Formas sonoras: mapa fónico de las lenguas mexicanas [Voiced forms: A phonic map of Mexican languages] (Estudios de Linguística 6). México D.F.: Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne. 1991. An accentual analysis of tone in Chalcatongo Mixtec. In Redden, James E. (ed.), Papers from the American Indian Languages Conferences held at the University of California, Santa Cruz (Occasional Papers on Linguistics 16), 173–182. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio. 2005. The sounds of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbard, Kathleen. 1995. Toward a theory of phonological and phonetic timing: Evidence from Bantu. In Connell, Bruce & Arvaniti, Amalia (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV: Phonology and phonetic evidence, 168–187. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huffman, Marie K. & Krakow, Rena A. (eds.). 1993. Phonetics and phonology: Nasals, nasalization, and the velum , vol. 5. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Georgia G. & Pike, Eunice V.. 1969. The phonology and tone sandhi of Molinos Mixtec. Journal of Linguistics 47, 24–40.Google Scholar
Iverson, Gregory K. & Salmons, Joseph C.. 1996. Mixtec prenasalization as hypervoicing. International Journal of American Linguistics 62(2), 165–175.Google Scholar
Jassem, Wiktor. 1968. Acoustic description of voiceless fricatives in terms of spectral parameters. In Jassem, Wiktor (ed.), Speech analysis and synthesis , 189–206. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
Johnson, Keith. 2012. Acoustic & auditory phonetics , 3rd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1942–1943. Chronemes and tonemes. Acta Linguistica 3, 1–10.Google Scholar
Josserand, Judy K. 1983. Mixtec dialect history . Ph.D. dissertation, Tulane University.Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia A. 1984. Phonetic and phonological representation of stop consonant voicing. Language 60, 286–319.Google Scholar
Kingston, John & Diehl, Randy L.. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70(3), 419–454.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter & Maddieson, Ian. 1996. Sounds of the world’s languages . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse. 1970. Suprasegmentals . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F. & Fennig, Charles D.. 2013. Ethnologue: Languages of the world , 17th edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International. http://www.ethnologue.com.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn, Lyberg, Bertil & Holmgren, Karin. 1981. Durational patterns of Swedish phonology: Do they reflect short-term motor memory processes? Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn & Rapp, Karin. 1973. Some temporal regularities of spoken Swedish. Papers from the Instititue of Linguistics at the University of Stockholm 21, 1–59.Google Scholar
Lisker, Leigh & Abramson, Arthur S.. 1964. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word 20, 384–422.Google Scholar
Longacre, Robert E. 1957. Proto-Mixtecan. International Journal of American Linguistics 23(4), 1–195.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Monica. 1996. A grammar of Chalcatongo Mixtec (University of California Publications in Linguistics 127). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Macaulay, Monica & Salmons, Joseph C.. 1995. The phonology of glottalization in Mixtec. International Journal of American Linguistics 61(1), 38–61.Google Scholar
Macken, Marlys A. & Salmons, Joseph C.. 1997. Prosodic templates in sound change. Diachronica 14(1), 31–66.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 1997. Phonetic universals. In Hardcastle, William J. & Laver, John (eds.), The handbook of phonetic sciences , 619–639. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Maddieson, Ian. 2008. Glides and gemination. Lingua 118, 1926–1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian, Avelino, Heriberto &O’Connor, Loretta. 2009. The phonetic structures of Oaxaca Chontal. International Journal of American Linguistics 75(1), 69–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian & Ladefoged, Peter. 1993. Phonetics of partially nasal consonants. In Huffman & Krakow (eds.), 251–301.Google Scholar
Maniwa, Kazumi, Jongman, Allard & Wade, Travis. 2009. Acoustic characteristics of clearly spoken English fricatives. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 125(6), 3962–3973.Google ScholarPubMed
Marlett, Stephen A. 1992. Nasalization in Mixtec languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 58(4), 425–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonough, Joyce M. 2003. The Navajo sound system . Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
McGowan, Richard S. & Nittrouer, Susan. 1988. Differences in fricative production between children and adults: Evidence from an acoustic analysis of /ʃ/ and /s/. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83(1), 229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nartey, Jonas. 1982. On fricative phones and phonemes . Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
North, Joanne & Shields, Jäna. 1977. Silacayoapan Mixtec phonology. In Merrifield, William. R. (ed.), Studies in Otomanguean phonology , 21–33. Arlington, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 2001. The phonetics of sound change. In Kreidler, Charles W. (ed.), Phonology: Critical concepts in linguistics , vol. 4, 44–81. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. &Ohala, Manjari. 1993. The phonetics of nasal phonology: Theorems and data. In Huffman & Krakow (eds.), 225–249.Google Scholar
Olive, Joseph P., Greenwood, Alice & Coleman, John. 1993. Acoustics of American English speech: A dynamic approach . New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Olson, Daniel J. 2013. Bilingual language switching and selection at the phonetic level: Asymmetrical transfer in VOT production. Journal of Phonetics , 41, 407–420.Google Scholar
Palancar, Enrique L., Amith, Jonathan D. & García, Rey Castillo. 2016. Verbal inflection in Yoloxóchitl Mixtec. In Palancar, Enrique L. & Léonard, Jean-Léo (eds.), Tone and inflection: New facts and new perspectives , 295–336. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pankratz, Leo & Pike, Eunice V.. 1967. Phonology and morphotonemics of Ayutla Mixtec. International Journal of American Linguistics 33(4), 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pike, Eunice V. & Cowan, John H.. 1967. Mixtec phonology and morphophonemics. Anthropological Linguistics 9(5), 1–15.Google Scholar
Pike, Eunice V. & Ibach, Thomas. 1978. The phonology of the Mixtepec dialect of Mixtec. In Jazayery, Mohammad Ali, Polomé, Edgar C. & Winter, Werner (eds.), Linguistic and literary studies in honor of Archibald A. Hill , vol. 2: Descriptive linguistics , 271–285. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Pike, Eunice V. & Oram, Joy. 1976. Stress and tone in the phonology of Diuxi Mixtec. Phonetica 33, 321–333.Google Scholar
Pike, Eunice V. & Wistrand, Kent. 1974. Step-up terrace tone in Acatlán Mixtec. In Brend, Ruth M. (ed.), Advances in tagmemics , 81–104. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Pike, Kenneth L. 1944. Analysis of a Mixteco text. International Journal of American Linguistics 10(4), 113–138.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [computer program]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Rensch, Calvin R. 1976. Comparative Otomanguean phonology (Language Science Monograph 14). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.Google Scholar
Shadle, Christine H. 2012. On the acoustics and aerodynamics of fricatives. In Cohn, Abigail C., Fougeron, Cécile, Huffman, Marie K. & Renwick, Margaret E. L. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of laboratory phonology , 511–526. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Silverman, Daniel, Blankenship, Barbara, Kirk, Paul &Ladefoged, Peter. 1995. Phonetic structures in Jalapa Mazatec. Anthropological Linguistics 37(1), 70–88.Google Scholar
Soli, Sigfrid D. 1981. Second formants in fricatives: Acoustic consequences of fricative–vowel coarticulation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 70, 976–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steriade, Donca. 1993. Orality and markedness. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 19): General Session and Parasession on Semantic Typology and Semantic Universals , 334–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. 2000. Acoustic phonetics . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, Mary & Hajek, John. 2004. A preliminary investigation of some acoustic characteristics of ejectives in Waima’a: VOT and closure duration Proceedings of the 10th Australian International Conference on Speech Science & Technology , Macquarie University, Syndey, 277–282.Google Scholar
Suh, Yunju. 2009. Phonological and phonetic asymmetries of Cw combinations . Ph.D. dissertation, Stony Brook University.Google Scholar
Tarnóczy, Tamás. 1965. Can the problem of automatic speech recognition be solved by analysis alone? Rapports de 5e Congrés International d’Acoustique , vol. II, 371–387. Liége: D. E. Commins.Google Scholar
Turk, Alice & Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanie. 2000. Word-boundary-related duration patterns in English. Journal of Phonetics 28, 397–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umeda, Noriko. 1977. Consonant duration in American English. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61(3), 846–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weismer, Gary. 1980. Control of the voicing distinction for intervocalic stops and fricatives: Some data and theoretical considerations. Journal of Phonetics 8, 427–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westbury, John R. & Keating, Patricia A.. 1986. On the naturalness of stop consonant voicing. Journal of Linguistics 22, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, Douglas H. 1981. Effects of vocalic formant transitions and vowel quality on the English [s]–[š] boundary. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 69, 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, Douglas H. 1983. Vowel information in postvocalic fricative noises. Language and Speech 26, 91–100.Google ScholarPubMed
White, Laurence & Turk, Alice. 2010. English words on the Procrustean bed: Polysyllabic shortening reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics , 38, 459–471.Google Scholar
Xu, Yi & Emily Wang, Q.. 2001. Pitch targets and their realization: Evidence from Mandarin Chinese. Speech Communication 33, 319–337.Google Scholar
Zylstra, Carol F. 1980. Phonology and morphophonemics of the Mixtec of Alacatlatzala, Guerrero. SIL–Mexico Workpapers 4, 15–42.Google Scholar