Semivowel
Manners of articulation |
Airstreams |
---|
Related |
In phonetics and phonology, a semivowel or glide, also known as a non-syllabic vocoid, is a sound that is phonetically similar to a vowel sound but functions as the syllable boundary, rather than as the nucleus of a syllable.[1] Examples of semivowels in English are the consonants y and w, in yes and west. Written /j w/ in IPA, y and w are near to the vowels ee and oo in seen and moon, written /iː uː/ in IPA.
Classification
Semivowels form a subclass of approximants.[2][3] Although "semivowel" and "approximant" are sometimes treated as synonymous,[4] most authors agree that not all approximants are semivowels although the exact details may vary from author to author. For example, Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996) do not consider the labiodental approximant [ʋ] to be a semivowel[5] while Martínez Celdrán (2004) proposes that it should be considered one.[6]
In the International Phonetic Alphabet, the diacritic attached to non-syllabic vowel letters is U+032F ̯ COMBINING INVERTED BREVE BELOW. When there is no room for the tack under a letter, it may be written above, using U+0311 ̑ COMBINING INVERTED BREVE. Sometimes,[7] the 'extra-short' diacritic (U+0306 ̆ COMBINING BREVE) is used instead, which is not a completely correct transcription.
Additionally, there are dedicated symbols for four semivowels that correspond to the four close cardinal vowel sounds:[3]
Semivowel (non-syllabic) | Vowel (syllabic) |
---|---|
[j] (palatal approximant) | [i] (close front unrounded vowel) |
[ɥ] (labio-palatal approximant) | [y] (close front rounded vowel) |
[ɰ] (velar approximant) | [ɯ] (close back unrounded vowel) |
[w] (labiovelar approximant) | [u] (close back rounded vowel) |
The pharyngeal approximant [ʕ̞] is also equivalent to the semivowel articulation of the open back unrounded vowel [ɑ̯].[5]
In addition, some authors[5][6] consider the rhotic approximants [y], [ɻ ] to be semivowels corresponding to R-colored vowels such as [ɚ]. As mentioned above, the labiodental approximant [ʋ] is considered a semivowel in some treatments. An unrounded central semivowel, [ ȷ̈ ] (also written ⟨ɉ⟩), equivalent to [ɨ], is uncommon, though rounded [ẅ] (or [w̟]), equivalent to [ʉ], is found in Swedish and Norwegian.
Contrast with vowels
Semivowels, by definition, contrast with vowels by being non-syllabic. In addition, they are usually shorter than vowels.[2] In languages as diverse as Amharic, Yoruba, and Zuni, semivowels are produced with a narrower constriction in the vocal tract than their corresponding vowels.[5] Nevertheless, semivowels may be phonemically equivalent with vowels. For example, the English word fly can be considered either as an open syllable ending in a diphthong [flaɪ̯], or as a closed syllable ending in a consonant [flaj].[8]
It is unusual for a language to contrast a semivowel and a diphthong containing an equivalent vowel, but Romanian contrasts the diphthong /e̯a/ with /ja/, a perceptually similar approximant-vowel sequence. The diphthong is analyzed as a single segment, and the approximant-vowel sequence is analysed as two separate segments.
In addition to phonological justifications for the distinction (such as the diphthong alternating with /e/ in singular-plural pairs), there are phonetic differences between the pair:[9]
- /ja/ has a greater duration than /e̯a/
- The transition between the two elements is longer and faster for /ja/ than /e̯a/ with the former having a higher F2 onset (greater constriction of the articulators).
Although a phonological parallel exists between /o̯a/ and /wa/, the production and perception of phonetic contrasts between the two is much weaker, likely because of lower lexical load for /wa/ (which is limited largely to loanwords from French) and a difficulty in maintaining contrasts between two back rounded glides in comparison to front ones.[10]
Contrast with fricatives/spirant approximants
According to the standard definitions, semivowels (such as [j]) contrast with fricatives (such as [ʝ]) in that fricatives produce turbulence, but semivowels do not. In discussing Spanish, Martínez Celdrán suggests setting up a third category of "spirant approximant", contrasting both with semivowel approximants and with fricatives.[11] Though the spirant approximant is more constricted (having a lower F2 amplitude), longer, and unspecified for rounding (viuda [ˈbjuða] 'widow' vs. ayuda [aˈʝʷuða] 'help'),[12] the distributional overlap is limited. The spirant approximant can only appear in the syllable onset (including word-initially, where the semivowel never appears). The two overlap in distribution after /l/ and /n/: enyesar [ẽɲɟʝeˈsaɾ] ('to plaster') aniego [ãnjeɣo] ('flood')[13] and although there is dialectal and ideolectal variation, speakers may also exhibit other near-minimal pairs like abyecto ('abject') vs abierto ('opened').[14] One potential minimal pair (depending on dialect) is ya visto [(ɟ)ʝaˈβisto] ('I have already seen') vs y ha visto [jaˈβisto] ('and he has seen').[15] Again, it is not present in all dialects. Other dialects differ in either merging the two or in enhancing the contrast by moving the former to another place of articulation ([ʒ]).
See also
- Diphthong
- List of phonetics topics
- Syllabic consonant
- Hiatus (linguistics)
- Voiced labio-velar approximant
References
- ↑ Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996:322)
- 1 2 Crystal (2003:413)
- 1 2 Martínez Celdrán (2004:9)
- ↑ Meyer (2005:101)
- 1 2 3 4 Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996:323)
- 1 2 Martínez Celdrán (2004:8)
- ↑ See e.g. Mangold (2005:42)
- ↑ Cohen (1971:51)
- ↑ Chitoran (2002:212–214)
- ↑ Chitoran (2002:221)
- ↑ Martínez Celdrán (2004:6)
- ↑ Martínez Celdrán (2004:208)
- ↑ Trager (1942:222)
- ↑ Saporta (1956:288)
- ↑ Bowen & Stockwell (1955:236)
Bibliography
- Bowen, J. Donald; Stockwell, Robert P. (1955), "The Phonemic Interpretation of Semivowels in Spanish", Language, Linguistic Society of America, 31 (2): 236–240, doi:10.2307/411039, JSTOR 411039
- Chitoran, Ioana (2002), "A perception-production study of Romanian diphthongs and glide-vowel sequences", Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 32 (2): 203–222, doi:10.1017/S0025100302001044
- Crystal, David (2003), A dictionary of linguistics & phonetics (fifth ed.), Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 0-631-22664-8
- Cohen, Antonie (1971), The phonemes of English: a phonemic study of the vowels and consonants of standard English (third ed.), Springer, ISBN 90-247-0639-4
- Ladefoged, Peter; Maddieson, Ian (1996). The Sounds of the World's Languages. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-19814-8.
- Mangold, Max (2005), Das Aussprachewörterbuch (6th ed.), Duden, ISBN 978-3411040667
- Martínez Celdrán, Eugenio (2004), "Problems in the Classification of Approximants" (PDF), Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 34 (2): 201–210, doi:10.1017/S0025100304001732, archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-07-11, retrieved 2015-02-14
- Meyer, Paul Georg (2005), Synchronic English Linguistics: An Introduction (third ed.), Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, ISBN 3-8233-6191-0
- Saporta, Sol (1956), "A Note on Spanish Semivowels", Language, Linguistic Society of America, 32 (2): 287–290, doi:10.2307/411006, JSTOR 411006
- Trager, George (1942), "The Phonemic Treatment of Semivowels", Language, Linguistic Society of America, 18 (3): 220–223, doi:10.2307/409556, JSTOR 409556
Further reading
- Ohala, John; Lorentz, James, "The story of [w]: An exercise in the phonetic explanation for sound patterns", in Whistler, Kenneth; Chiarelloet, Chris; van Vahn, Robert Jr., Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society, pp. 577–599