1. Introduction

1. 1. Introduction Recent work on phonological vowel reduction has attempted to tighten the link between phonetics and phonology. (Among others: Barnes 2002; Crosswhite to appear; Flemming to appear; Herrick 2003; Padgett 2004; Padgett and Tabain to appear). Since these analyses are more phonetic in nature they make more precise phonetic predictions; in turn, they require more phonetically detailed data to determine the extent to which their predictions are accurate. This paper uses acoustic data collected from six varieties of Catalan to examine the appropriateness of a Dispersion Theory (DT; Flemming 1995; Padgett 1997; Sanders 2003) explanation of vowel reduction. Phonetics and Phonology in Iberia 2005 [PAPI 2005], Universitat Autònoma de BarcelonaJune 20-21st, 2005Catalan Vowel Reduction and Dispersion TheoryDylan HerrickMie University 5. Dispersion Theory and vowel reduction • Each language enforces a particular distance  which must be maintained between contrasting vowel phonemes. See (6a). • Articulatory constraints against low vowels in unstressed syllables result in a decrease in the available perceptual distance between (unstressed) vowel pairs. • The distance between unstressed vowel phonemes is less than the language particular distance . See (6b). • The result is neutralization among unstressed vowels (until the language specific distance requirement  can be met). See (6c). See Flemming (to appear); Padgett (2004); Padgett and Tabain (to appear); Herrick (2003) for a more detailed explanation. For related but non-DT explanations, see Barnes (2002) and Crosswhite (to appear). 9. Neutralization • Neutralization is complete. • Anova (p < 0.01) show that there are no statistically significant differences between vowels which are reported to neutralize in unstressed position – for all speakers and for all varieties. (Herrick 2003) 10. Raising • The primary characteristic of Catalan Vowel Reduction is raising (along F1) – not centralization (lowering, reduction of F2) • Predictions for raising (6-28% for Western; 29-57% for Eastern) are met. (Herrick 2003) 6. Illustration of DT Account of Vowel Reduction 2. Background • Six varieties of Catalan: Bages, Girona, Ciutadella, Palma, Lloseta, and Lleida 11. Perceptual Distance • Distance (as a percent of the total space) in F1 for stressed front vowels • Vowel Reduction in Catalan • Euclidian distance (F1 x F2; as a percent of the total space) for stressed front vowels • Predictions for minimal perceptual distance are not met. (Herrick 2003) 7. DT Predictions and Assumptions • Duration The DT explanation depends, in large part, upon constraints against duration and jaw lowering to drive the neutralization of contrasts. • Neutralization DT assumes that vowel reduction will result in the complete neutralization of contrasting segments. (If not, one could argue that the vowels are simply more crowded and easier to confuse, but still distinct.) • Raising DT predicts that vowel reduction is due primarily to raising – and not necessarily centralization (even for Western Catalan – which does not reduce to schwa in unstressed position). • Perceptual Distance DT makes extensive use of perceptual distance constraints – to what extent do vowels obey a language specific minimal distance ? 12. Conclusion • Data from six varieties of Catalan provide support for three aspects of a DT analysis of phonological vowel reduction: (a) Duration (b) Neutralization (c) Raising • The predictions for perceptual distance, however, are not met by either a straightforward measure of linear distance (for F1) or the Euclidian distance (F1 x F2) between neighboring vowel pairs. 3. Speakers • Three native speakers per variety (regional dialect). • All female college students between 18-25 years old. • Native: both parents are native speakers; Catalan is the speaker’s first language and the primary language of daily speech. Selected References Barnes, J.A. 2002. Positional neutralization: a phonologization approach to typological predictions. Doctoral dissertation, UC Berkeley. Crosswhite, K. to appear. Vowel reduction. In Hayes, B., R. Kirchner, and D. Steriade (eds.) Phonetic bases of markedness. Cambridge: Cambridge, University Press. Flemming, E. 1995. Auditory representations in phonology. Doctoral dissertation. UCLA. Flemming, E. to appear. Contrast and perceptual distinctiveness. In Hayes, B., R. Kirchner, and D. Steriade (eds.), Phonetic bases of markedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Herrick, D. 2003. An acoustic analysis of phonological vowel reduction in six varieties of Catalan. Doctoral dissertation, UC Santa Cruz. Padgett, J. 1997. Perceptual distance of contrast: vowel height and nasality. Phonology at Santa Cruz, vol. 5: 63-78. Padgett, J. 2004. Russian vowel reduction and Dispersion Theory. Phonological Studies, 7:81-96. Padgett, J. and M. Tabain. to appear. Adaptive dispersion theory and phonological vowel reduction in Russian. Phonetica. Sanders, N. 2003. Opacity and sound change in the Polish lexicon. Doctoral dissertation. UC Santa Cruz. 4. Dispersion Theory • Three principles of Dispersion Theory (Flemming 1995) A. Maximize the number of contrasts. (easy to make big lexicons) B. Maximize the distinctiveness of contrasts. (easy perception) C. Minimize articulatory effort. (laziness) 8. Duration • Unstressed vowels are shorter than stressed vowels • High vowels and schwa are shorter than other vowels