Vowel formants before /z/ vs. /z ʕ / (a) and after /z/ vs. /z ʕ / (b). Formants plotted are mean values in adjacent third of the vowel. Ellipses show 95% confidence intervals (omitted where low token count prohibits calculation).

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... 3 provides kernel density estimate plots of /z/ and /z ʕ / distributions by mean F1 (yaxis) and F2 (x-axis), as measured within the consonants. Overall, Figure 3 shows that the two consonants differ substantially along F2 but much less so along F1; this is also the case for the vowels adjacent to /z/ and /z ʕ / (Figure 4), similar to Zawaydeh & de Jong's (2011) findings in Ammani-Jordanian Arabic. This indicates that, unlike in other languages (see Al Tamini (2017) on Arabic and Shahin (1997) on St'át'imcets), what is termed "pharyngealization" in Tŝilhqot'in is manifested primarily as backing, without substantial lowering. ...

Context 2

... predicted based on Cook (2013) and also described for Arabic ( Embarki et al. 2011, Laver 1994, adjacent vowels also reliably correlate with phonemic pharyngealization. For example, the final /a/ of teẑilhchaz /tez ʕ iɬt ͡ ʃaz/ 'I started to fry it' is realized as [ae] (with a relatively high F2) whereas in telhant'aẑ /teɬant'az ʕ / 'crowberry' it is realized as [ɑ] (with a relatively low F2). 10 Figure 4 provides the acoustic vowel spaces before /z/ vs. /z ʕ / (a) and after /z/ vs. /z ʕ / (b). This plot is based on F1 and F2 measurements averaged over the third of the vowel that is adjacent to the target consonant, i.e. the last third for vowels preceding /z/ and /z ʕ / and the first third for vowels occurring after /z/ and /z ʕ /. ...