Re: What _is_ rhoticity? (wa laterals (was: Pharingials etc))

Hey.

The definition I gave earlier for rhotics (lowered third formant) is
the one favored by Ladefoged. However, another study (Lindau 1985)
muddies the waters considerably. She lists the following sounds as
rhotics (not an exhaustive list):

[4]    tap/flap
[r]    apical trill
[r_0]  voiceless apical trill
[r\]   approximant
[R\]   uvular trill (IPA small cap "R")
[R]    voiced uvular fricative (IPA inverted small cap "R")
[X]    voiceless uvular fricative

There are five properties which some of these sounds share:

1  pulse pattern (trill)
2  closure duration
3  presence of formants (sonorant)
4  presence of noise
5  distribution of spectral energy (place of articulation)

Not all rhotics have all five properties, and there is no property
which characterizes all rhotics. Rather, the relation is one of "family
resemblance":

[4], [r], and [r\] are all apical/alveolar (5)
[r], [r\], [R\], and [R] have formants present (3)
[R\], [R], and [X] are all uvular (5)
[R\], [r], and [r_0] are all trilled (1)

etc.

So it seems that there is no concensus on what constitutes a rhotic.

Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga
Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie

Reply