Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton April 11, 2018

Regional Variation in Fundamental Frequency of American English Vowels

  • Ewa Jacewicz and Robert Allen Fox
From the journal Phonetica

Abstract

We examined whether the fundamental frequency (f0) of vowels is influenced by regional variation, aiming to (1) establish how the relationship between vowel height and f0 (“intrinsic f0”) is utilized in regional vowel systems and (2) determine whether regional varieties differ in their implementation of the effects of phonetic context on f0 variations. An extended set of acoustic measures explored f0 in vowels in isolated tokens (experiment 1) and in connected speech (experiment 2) from 36 women representing 3 different varieties of American English. Regional differences were found in f0 shape in isolated tokens, in the magnitude of intrinsic f0 difference between high and low vowels, in the nature of f0 contours in stressed vowels, and in the completion of f0 contours in the context of coda voicing. Regional varieties utilize f0 control in vowels in different ways, including regional f0 ranges and variation in f0 shape.


verified



*Ewa Jacewicz, Department of Speech and Hearing Science, Ohio State University, 1070 Carmack Road, Columbus, OH 43210 (USA), E-Mail jacewicz.1@osu.edu

References

1 Alku P, Pohjalainen J, Vainio M, Laukkanen A-M, Story BH (2013): Formant frequency estimation of high-pitched vowels using weighted linear prediction. J Acoust Soc Am 134:1295-1313.10.1121/1.4812756Search in Google Scholar

2 Arvaniti A, Garding G (2007): Dialectal variation in the rising accents of American English; in Cole J, Hualde J (eds): Laboratory Phonology 9. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 547-576.Search in Google Scholar

3 Atal BS (1975): Linear prediction of speech - recent applications to speech analysis; in Reddy RD (ed): Speech Recognition. New York, Elsevier, pp 221-230.Search in Google Scholar

4 Beckman ME, Pierrehumbert JB (1986): Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonol Yearb 3:255-309.10.1017/S095267570000066XSearch in Google Scholar

5 Boberg C (2005): The Canadian shift in Montreal. Lang Var Change 17:133-154.10.1017/S0954394505050064Search in Google Scholar

6 Clopper CG, Pisoni D, de Jong K (2005): Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English. J Acoust Soc Am 118:1661-1676.10.1121/1.2000774Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7 Clopper CG, Smiljanic R (2011): Effects of gender and regional dialect on prosodic patterns in American English. J Phon 39:237-245.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.02.006Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8 Connell B (2002): Tone languages and the universality of intrinsic F0: evidence from Africa. J Phon 30:101-129.10.1006/jpho.2001.0156Search in Google Scholar

9 De Boer B (2011): First formant difference for /i/ and /u/: a cross-linguistic study and an explanation. J Phon 39:110-114.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.005Search in Google Scholar

10 Derdemezis E, Vorperian HK, Kent RD, Fourakis M, Reinicke EL, Bolt DM (2016): Optimizing vowel formant measurements in four acoustic analysis systems for diverse speaker groups. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 25:335-354.10.1044/2015_AJSLP-15-0020Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11 Deutsch D, Henthorn T, Dolson M (2004): Speech patterns heard early in life influence later perception of the triton paradox. Music Percept 21:357-372.10.1525/mp.2004.21.3.357Search in Google Scholar

12 Deutsch D, Jinghong L, Sheng J, Henthorn T (2009): The pitch levels of female speech in two Chinese villages. J Acoust Soc Am 125:208-213.10.1121/1.3113892Search in Google Scholar PubMed

13 Diehl RL, Kluender KR (1989): On the objects of speech perception. Ecol Psychol 1:121-144.10.1207/s15326969eco0102_2Search in Google Scholar

14 Durian D, Dodsworth R, Schumacher J (2010): Convergence in blue-collar Columbus, Ohio, African American and White vowel systems? In Yaeger-Dror M, Thomas E (eds): AAE Speakers and Their Participation in Local Sound Changes: A Comparative Study. Publications of the American Dialect Society No 94. Durham, Duke University Press, pp 161-190.Search in Google Scholar

15 Fischer-Jørgensen E (1990): Intrinsic F0 in tense and lax vowels with specific reference to German. Phonetica 47:99-140.10.1159/000261858Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16 Fox RA, Jacewicz E (2008): Analysis of total vowel space areas in three regional dialects of American English. Proc Acoustics 08, Paris, pp 495-500.Search in Google Scholar

17 Fox RA, Jacewicz E (2009): Cross-dialectal variation in formant dynamics of American English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 126:2603-2618.10.1121/1.3212921Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18 Fox RA, Jacewicz E (2017): Reconceptualizing the vowel space in analyzing regional dialect variation and sound change in American English. J Acoust Soc Am 142:444-459.10.1121/1.4991021Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19 Fry D (1958): Experiments in the perception of stress. Lang Speech 1:126-152.10.1177/002383095800100207Search in Google Scholar

20 Fulop SA (2010): Accuracy of formant measurement for synthesized vowels using the reassigned spectrogram and comparison with linear prediction. J Acoust Soc Am 127:2114-2117.10.1121/1.3308476Search in Google Scholar PubMed

21 Fulop SA (2011): Speech Spectrum Analysis. Berlin, Springer, pp 127-201.10.1007/978-3-642-17478-0Search in Google Scholar

22 Gordon M (2002): Investigating chain shifts and mergers; in Chambers JK, Trudgill P, Schilling-Estes N (eds): The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford, Blackwell, pp 244-266.Search in Google Scholar

23 Halle M, Stevens KN (1971): A note on laryngeal features; in Research Laboratory of Electronics (ed): Quarterly Progress Reports 101. Cambridge, MIT Press, pp 198-213Search in Google Scholar

24 Hanson HM (2009): Effects of obstruent consonants on fundamental frequency at vowel onset in English. J Acoust Soc Am 125:425-441.10.1121/1.3021306Search in Google Scholar PubMed

25 Hillenbrand JM, Clark MJ, Houde RA (2000): Some effects of duration on vowel recognition. J Acoust Soc Am 108:3013-3022.10.1121/1.1323463Search in Google Scholar PubMed

26 Hillenbrand JM, Clark MJ, Nearey TM (2001): Effects of consonantal environment on vowel formant patterns. J Acoust Soc Am 109:748-763.10.1121/1.1337959Search in Google Scholar PubMed

27 Hillenbrand JM, Getty LA, Clark MJ, Wheeler K (1995): Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 97:3099-3111.10.1121/1.411872Search in Google Scholar PubMed

28 Hombert JM, Ohala JJ, Ewan WG (1979): Phonetic explanations for the development of tones. Language 55:37-58.10.2307/412518Search in Google Scholar

29 Honda K (1983): Relationship between pitch control and vowel articulation; in Bless D, Abbs J (eds): Vocal Fold Physiology: Contemporary Research and Clinical Issues. San Diego, College-Hill Press, pp 127-137.Search in Google Scholar

30 Honda K, Fujimura·(1991): Intrinsic vowel F0 and phrase-final F0 lowering: phonological vs biological explanations; in Gauffin J, Hammarberg B (eds): Vocal Fold Physiology: Acoustic, Perceptual, and Physiological Aspects of Voice Mechanisms. San Diego, Singular Publishing Group, pp 149-157.Search in Google Scholar

31 Honda K, Hirai H, Masaki S, Shamada Y (1999): Role of vertical larynx movement and cervical lordosis in F0 control. Lang Speech 42:401-411.10.1177/00238309990420040301Search in Google Scholar PubMed

32 House A, Fairbanks G (1953): The influence of consonant environment upon the secondary acoustical characteristics of vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 22:105-113.10.1121/1.1906982Search in Google Scholar

33 House J, Wichmann A (1996): Investigating peak timing in naturally occurring speech: from segmental constraints to discourse structure; in Hazan V, Rosen S, Holland M (eds): Speech Hearing and Language: Work in Progress 9. London, University College London, pp 99-117.Search in Google Scholar

34 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2008a): Amplitude variations in coarticulated vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 123:2750-2768.10.1121/1.2897034Search in Google Scholar PubMed

35 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2008b): The temporal location of rms peak in coarticulated vowels. Proc Acoustics 08, Paris, SFA, pp 627-632.Search in Google Scholar

36 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2012): The effects of cross-generational and cross-dialectal variation on vowel identification and classification. J Acoust Soc Am 131:1413-1433.10.1121/1.3676603Search in Google Scholar PubMed

37 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2015a): Intrinsic fundamental frequency of vowels is moderated by regional dialect. J Acoust Soc Am 138:EL405-EL410.10.1121/1.4934178Search in Google Scholar PubMed

38 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2015b): The effects of dialect variation on speech intelligibility in a multitalker background. Appl Psycholinguist 36:729-746.10.1017/S0142716413000489Search in Google Scholar

39 Jacewicz E, Fox RA (2015c): Eliciting sociophonetic variation in vowel duration (paper ICPHS0016). Proc 18th Int Congr Phon Sci, Glasgow, pp 1-5.Search in Google Scholar

40 Jacewicz E, Fox RA, Lyle S (2009): Variation in stop consonant voicing in two regional varieties of American English. J Int Phon Assoc 39:313-334.10.1017/S0025100309990156Search in Google Scholar PubMed

41 Jacewicz E, Fox RA, Salmons J (2007): Vowel duration in three American English dialects. Am Speech 82:367-385.10.1215/00031283-2007-024Search in Google Scholar PubMed

42 Jacewicz E, Fox RA, Salmons J (2011a): Cross-generational vowel change in American English. Lang Var Change 23:1-42.10.1017/S0954394510000219Search in Google Scholar PubMed

43 Jacewicz E, Fox RA, Salmons J (2011b): Vowel change across three age groups of speakers in three regional varieties of American English. J Phon 39:683-693.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.07.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed

44 Kent RD, Read C (1992): The Acoustic Analysis of Speech. San Diego, Singular Publishing Group.Search in Google Scholar

45 Kingston J (1992): The phonetics and phonology of perceptually motivated articulatory covariation. Lang Speech 35:99-113.10.1177/002383099203500209Search in Google Scholar PubMed

46 Kingston J (2007): Segmental influences on F0: automatic or controlled? In Gussenhoven C, Riad T (eds): Tones and Tunes. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, vol 2, pp 171-210.Search in Google Scholar

47 Kirby JP, Ladd DR (2016): Effects of obstruent voicing on vowel F0: evidence from “true voicing” languages. J Acoust Soc Am 140:2400-2411.10.1121/1.4962445Search in Google Scholar PubMed

48 Koops C (2010): /u/-fronting is not monolithic: two types of fronted /u/ in Houston Anglos. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 16:113-122.Search in Google Scholar

49 Kurath H (1939): Handbook of the Linguistic Geography of New England. With the Collaboration of Hansen ML, Bloch B, Bloch J. Providence, Brown University.Search in Google Scholar

50 Labov W (1994): Principles of Linguistic Change. Oxford, Blackwell, vol 1: Internal Factors.Search in Google Scholar

51 Labov W (2010): Principles of Linguistic Change. Oxford, Blackwell, vol 3: Cognitive and Cultural Factors.10.1002/9781444327496Search in Google Scholar

52 Labov W, Ash S, Boberg C (2006): Atlas of North American English: Phonetics, Phonology, and Sound Change. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110167467Search in Google Scholar

53 Labov W, Yaeger M, Steiner R (1972): A Quantitative Study of Sound Change in Progress. Philadelphia, US Regional Survey.Search in Google Scholar

54 Ladd DR (1996): Intonational Phonology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

55 Ladd DR, Silverman KEA (1984): Vowel intrinsic pitch in connected speech. Phonetica 41:31-40.10.1159/000261708Search in Google Scholar

56 Ladd DR, Schepman A, White L, Quarmby LM, Stackhouse R (2009): Structural and dialectal effects on pitch peak alignment in two varieties of British English. J Phon 37:145-161.10.1016/j.wocn.2008.11.001Search in Google Scholar

57 Lea WA (1973): Segmental and suprasegmental influences on fundamental frequency contours; in Hyman LM (ed): Consonant Types and Tones. Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics No 1. Los Angeles, University of Southern California Press, pp 15-70.Search in Google Scholar

58 Lehiste I, Peterson GE (1960): Duration of syllable nuclei in English. J Acoust Soc Am 32:693-703.10.1121/1.1908183Search in Google Scholar

59 Lehiste I, Peterson GE (1961): Some basic considerations in the analysis of intonation. J Acoust Soc Am 33:419-425.10.1121/1.1908681Search in Google Scholar

60 Leung K, Jongman A, Wang Y, Sereno J (2016): Acoustic characteristics of clearly spoken English tense and lax vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 140:45-58.10.1121/1.4954737Search in Google Scholar PubMed

61 Lindblom B, Agwuele A, Sussman HM, Cortes EE (2007): The effect of emphatic stress on consonant vowel coarticulation. J Acoust Soc Am 12:3802-3813.10.1121/1.2730622Search in Google Scholar PubMed

62 Liu L, Shimamura T (2015): Pitch-synchronous linear prediction analysis of high-pitched speech using weighted short-time energy function. J Sig Proc 19:55-66.10.2299/jsp.19.55Search in Google Scholar

63 Löfqvist A, Baer T, McGarr NS, Story RS (1989): The cricothyroid muscle in voicing control. J Acoust Soc Am 85:1314-1321.10.1121/1.397462Search in Google Scholar PubMed

64 MathWorks Inc, Natick, MA (2014a): MATLAB. http://www.mathworks.com.Search in Google Scholar

65 Milenkovic P (2003): TF32 software program. Madison, University of Wisconsin.Search in Google Scholar

66 Mohr B (1968): Intrinsic fundamental frequency variation II. Monthly Internal Memorandum, June. Berkeley, Phonology Laboratory, University of California, pp 23-32.Search in Google Scholar

67 Monsen RB, Engebretson AM (1983): The accuracy of formant frequency measurements: a comparison of spectrographic analysis and linear prediction. J Speech Hear Res 26:89-97.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

68 Morrison GS, Assmann PF (eds) (2013): Vowel Inherent Spectral Change. Berlin, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-14209-3Search in Google Scholar

69 Nishio M, Niimi S (2008): Changes in speaking fundamental frequency characteristics with aging. Folia Phoniatr Logop 60:120-127.10.1159/000118510Search in Google Scholar PubMed

70 Nolan F (2003): Intonational equivalence: an experimental evaluation of pitch scales; Proc 15th Int Congr Phon Sci, Barcelona, pp 771-774.Search in Google Scholar

71 Ohala JJ, Eukel BW (1987): Explaining the intrinsic pitch of vowels; in Channon R, Shockey L (eds): In Honor of Ilse Lehiste. Dordrecht, Foris, pp 207-215.Search in Google Scholar

72 Ohde RN (1984): Fundamental frequency as an acoustic correlate of stop consonant voicing. J Acoust Soc Am 75:224-230.10.1121/1.390399Search in Google Scholar PubMed

73 Olive JP, Greenwood A, Coleman J (1993): Acoustics of American English Speech: A Dynamic Approach. New York, Springer.Search in Google Scholar

74 Peterson GE, Barney HL (1952): Control methods used in a study of the vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 24:175-184.10.1121/1.1906875Search in Google Scholar

75 Pierce CA, Block RA, Aguinis H (2004): Cautionary note on reporting eta-squared values from multifactor ANOVA designs. Educ Psychol Meas 64:916-924.10.1177/0013164404264848Search in Google Scholar

76 Pierrehumbert JB, Steele SA (1989): Categories of tonal alignment in English. Phonetica 46:181-196.10.1159/000261842Search in Google Scholar PubMed

77 Redi LC (2003): Categorical effects in production of pitch contours in English. Proc 15th Int Congr Phon Sci, Barcelona, pp 2921-2924.Search in Google Scholar

78 Reubold U, Harrington J, Kleber F (2010): Vocal aging effects on F0 and the first formant: a longitudinal analysis in adult speakers. Speech Commun 52:638-651.10.1016/j.specom.2010.02.012Search in Google Scholar

79 Risdal M, Kohn M (2014): Ethnolectal and generational differences in vowel trajectories: evidence from African American English and the southern vowel system. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20:138-148.Search in Google Scholar

80 Sapir S (1989): The intrinsic pitch of vowels: theoretical, physiological, and clinical considerations. J Voice 3:44-51.10.1016/S0892-1997(89)80121-3Search in Google Scholar

81 Scicon R and D Inc (2005): PitchWorks. http://www.sciconrd.com.Search in Google Scholar

82 Shadle CH (1985): Intrinsic fundamental frequency of vowels in sentence context. J Acoust Soc Am 78:1562-1567.10.1121/1.392792Search in Google Scholar PubMed

83 Shadle CH, Nam H, Whalen DH (2016): Comparing measurement errors for formants in synthetic and natural vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 139:713-727.10.1121/1.4940665Search in Google Scholar PubMed

84 Silverman KEA, Pierrehumbert JB (1990): The timing of prenuclear high accents in English; in Kingston J, Beckman ME (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology 1. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 495-518.Search in Google Scholar

85 Sledd J (1966): Breaking, umlaut, and the southern drawl. Language 42:18-41.10.2307/411598Search in Google Scholar

86 Slis IH (1966): A Model for the Distinction between Voiceless and Voiced Consonants. Annual Progress Report 1. Eindhoven, Institute for Perception Research, Eindhoven University of Technology, pp 40-44.Search in Google Scholar

87 Smiljanic R (2006): Early vs late focus: pitch-peak alignment in two dialects of Serbian and Croatian; in Goldstein L, Whalen DH, Best C (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology 8. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 495-518.Search in Google Scholar

88 Stanford JN, Leddy-Cecere TA, Baclawski KP (2012): Farewell to the founders: major dialect changes along the east-west New England border. Am Speech 87:126-169.10.1215/00031283-1668190Search in Google Scholar

89 Steele SA (1986): Interaction of vowel F0 and prosody. Phonetica 43:92-105.10.1159/000261763Search in Google Scholar

90 Story BH, Bunton K (2016): Formant measurement in children's speech based on spectral filtering. Speech Commun 76:93-111.10.1016/j.specom.2015.11.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed

91 Thomas ER (2011): Sociophonetics: An Introduction. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, pp 184-223.Search in Google Scholar

92 Titze IR (2000): Principles of Voice Production, ed 2. Iowa City, National Center for Voice and Speech.Search in Google Scholar

93 Umeda N (1981): Influences of segmental factors on fundamental frequency in fluent speech. J Acoust Soc Am 70:350-355.10.1121/1.386783Search in Google Scholar

94 Vallabha GK, Tuller B (2002): Systematic errors in the formant analysis of steady-state vowels. Speech Commun 38:141-160.10.1016/S0167-6393(01)00049-8 Search in Google Scholar

95 Van Hoof S, Verhoeven J (2011): Intrinsic vowel F0, the size of vowel inventories and second language acquisition. J Phon 39:168-177.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.02.007Search in Google Scholar

96 Watson CI, Harrington J (1999): Acoustic evidence for dynamic formant trajectories in Australian English vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 106:458-468.10.1121/1.427069Search in Google Scholar PubMed

97 Whalen DH, Gick B, Kumada M, Honda K (1998): Cricothyroid activity in high and low vowels: exploring the automaticity of intrinsic F0. J Phon 27:125-142.10.1006/jpho.1999.0091Search in Google Scholar

98 Whalen DH, Levitt AG (1995): The universality of intrinsic F0 of vowels. J Phon 23:349-366.10.1016/S0095-4470(95)80165-0Search in Google Scholar

99 Xu Y (1997): Contextual tonal variations in Mandarin. J Phon 25:61-83.10.1006/jpho.1996.0034Search in Google Scholar

100 Xu Y (2015): Speech prosody - theories, models and analysis; in Meireles AR (ed): Courses on Speech Prosody. Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp 146-177.Search in Google Scholar

101 Xue SA, Hao GJ, Xu L, Moranski T (2008): Speaking fundamental frequency changes in women over time. Asia Pacific J Speech Lang Hear 11:189-194.10.1179/136132808805297197Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-12-12
Accepted: 2017-10-04
Published Online: 2018-04-11
Published in Print: 2018-10-01

© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel

Downloaded on 14.2.2025 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1159/000484610/html
Scroll to top button