Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:50:00.147Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phonetic and phonological contrasts in the acquisition of voicing: voice onset time production in Hindi and English*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Katharine Davis*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
*
CDMRC WJ-10, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.

Abstract

The present study examines adult and child word-initial voice onset time productions in English and Hindi (10 adults and 20 children in each language) to determine the age of acquisition of the phonemic voice contrast. Cross-linguistic differences in patterns of acquisition were found, but these need not be traced to the different phonological Systems per se. An examination of the data indicates that the best predictor of age of voice contrast acquisition across languages is one which rests on the actual acoustic differences between members of phonologically contrastive pairs. In general it was found that the larger the post-release voice onset time differences between pair members in the adult model, the earlier the contrast is reliably produced by child language learners.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

[*]

This study was conducted while the author was a doctoral student at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Selected preliminary results were presented at the Twenty-second Annual Child Language Research Forum held at Stanford University in April, 1990 and then published in Papers and Reports on Child Language Development (29, July 1990). Subsequent revisions owe much to Arjun Kapur, my dissertation committee, and anonymous reviewers. Collection of the Hindi data was supported by a grant from the American Institute of Indian Studies. The preparation of this article was supported by NIH grant No. 1 T32 DC00033–01, Research Training in the Speech and Hearing Sciences.

References

REFERENCES

Aslin, R. N. & Pisoni, D. B. (1980). Some developmental processes in speech perception. In Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Child phonology: Vol. 2, Perception. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clumeck, H., Barton, D., Macken, M. & Huntington, D. (1981). The aspiration contrast in Cantonese word-initial stops: data from children and adults. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 9, 210–24.Google Scholar
Cooper, W. E. (1977). The development of speech timing. In Segalowitz, S. J. & Gruber, F. A. (eds), Language development and neurological theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Davis, K. (1994). Features for Hindi stops. Journal of Phonetics 22, 177–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, K. & Beckman, M. (1983). Production and perception of the voicing contrast in Indian and American English. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 1, 7790.Google Scholar
Fischer-Jorgensen, E. & Hutters, B. (1981). Aspirated stop consonants before low vowels, a problem of delimitation – its causes and consequences. Annual Report of the Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Gandour, J., Petty, S. H., Dardarananda, R., Dechongkit, S. & Munkgoen, S. (1986). The acquisition of the voicing contrast in Thai: a study of voice onset time in word-initial stop consonants. Journal of Child Language 13, 561–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W. (1992). Developing phonological categories from the speech signal. In Ferguson, C. A., Menn, L. & Stoel-Gammon, C. (eds), Phonological development. Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Kewley-Port, D. & Preston, M. S. (1974). Early apical stop production: a voice onset time analysis. Journal of Phonetics 2, 195210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P. K. (1993). Early linguistic experience and phonetic perception: implications for theories of developmental speech perception. Journal of Phonetics 21, 125–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisker, L. & Abramson, A. S. (1964). A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: acoustical measurements. Word 20, 384422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisker, L. & Abramson, A. S. (1970). The voicing dimension: some experiments in comparative phonetics. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Prague: Academia.Google Scholar
Macken, M. A. & Barton, D. (1980 a). The acquisition of the voicing contrast in English: a study of voice onset time in word-initial stop consonants. Journal of Child Language 7, 4174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macken, M. A. & Barton, D. (1980 b). The acquisition of the voicing contrast in Spanish: a phonetic and phonological study of word-initial stop consonants. Journal of Child Language 7, 433–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohala, J. J. (1983). The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. In MacNeilage, P. F. (ed.), The production of speech. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Pisoni, D. B. & Tash, J. (1974). Reaction times to comparisons within and across phonetic categories. Perception & Psychophysics 15, 285–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schiefer, L. (1992). Trading relations in the perception of stops and their implications for a phonological theory. In Docherty, G. J. & Ladd, D. R. (eds), Papers in Laboratory Phonology II: gesture, segment, prosody. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N. & Keyser, S. J. (1989). Primary features and their enhancement in consonants. Language 65, 81106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English, Vol. 3. Cambridge: C.U.P.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werker, J. F. & Tees, R. C. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: initial capabilities and developmental change. Developmental Psychology 24, 672–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zlatin, M. A. & Koenigsknecht, R. A. (1976). Development of the voicing contrast: a comparison of voice onset time in stop perception and production. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 19, 93111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar