Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T04:26:34.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perception du contraste de nasalité vocalique en français1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

VÉRONIQUE DELVAUX
VÉRONIQUE DELVAUX*
Affiliation:
Université de Mons-Hainaut
*
Adresse pour correspondance: Véronique Delvaux, Service de Métrologie et Sciences du Langage, Université de Mons-Hainaut, 18, Place du Parc, 7000 Mons, Belgique e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Résumé

Cette étude examine la perception du contraste de nasalité vocalique en français standard, et vise, plus globalement, à contribuer à une meilleure compréhension des mécanismes présidant à la covariation phonétique dans les langues du monde. Nous présentons les résultats de deux expériences perceptuelles menées sur des auditeurs francophones et anglophones, l'une d'identification, l'autre de discrimination. L'expérience d'identification montre que la combinaison d'une réduction de la proéminence spectrale en F1/F3 et d'un abaissement de la fréquence de F2 est à la fois nécessaire et suffisante à l'identification des nasales du français standard, tous timbres et tous contextes confondus; le recours à la dimension secondaire (F2) est renforcé en contexte nasal. L'expérience de discrimination montre que la combinaison effectuée par les auditeurs entre les deux dimensions covariantes est d'origine sensorielle, et non décisionnelle.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 25 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

1

Une partie du travail présenté ici a été réalisée dans le cadre de notre thèse de doctorat, sous la direction de Didier Demolin. Nous tenons à remercier John Kingston pour l'aide apportée dans les expérimentations avec les auditeurs anglophones, et pour son soutien au cours de notre recherche. Merci également à Alain Soquet, qui a permis le développement des outils de traitement des données recueillies. Enfin, nous remercions Bernard Harmegnies, ainsi que trois relecteurs anonymes pour leurs commentaires et suggestions aux différentes étapes de l'élaboration de cet article.

References

RÉFÉRENCES

Bartkova, K. et Sorin, C. (1987). A model of segmental duration for speech synthesis in French. Speech Communication, 6: 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, P. S. (1993). The perception of nasal vowels. Dans: Huffman, M. K. et Krakow, R. A. (dir.), Phonetics and Phonology, vol. 5, Nasals, Nasalization and the Velum. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 171–196.Google Scholar
Beddor, P. S. et Hawkins, S. (1990). The influence of spectral prominence on perceived vowel quality. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87: 2684–2704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beddor, P. S. et Krakow, R. A. (1999). Perception of coarticulatory nasalization by speakers of English and Thai: Evidence for partial compensation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106: 2868–2887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beddor, P. S. et Strange, W. (1982). Cross-language study of perception of the oral-nasal distinction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 71: 1551–1561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernthal, J. E. et Beuckelman, D. R. (1977). The effect of changes in velopharyngeal orifice area on vowel intensity. Cleft Palate Journal, 14: 63–77.Google ScholarPubMed
Bloomer, H. et Peterson, G. (1955). A spectrographic study of hypernasality. Cleft Palate Bulletin, 5: 5–6.Google Scholar
Bothorel, A., Simon, P., Wioland, F. et Zerling, J.-P. (1986). Cinéradiographie des voyelles et consonnes du français. Travaux de l'Institut de Phonétique de Strasbourg, 18.Google Scholar
Brichler-Labaeye, C. (1970). Les voyelles françaises. Mouvements et positions articulatoires à la lumière de la radiocinématographie, Paris: Klincksieck, (coll. Bibliothèque française et romane, série A, n°18).Google Scholar
Butcher, A. (1976). The influence of the native language on the perception of vowel quality. Arbeitsberichte (Kiel), 6: 1–137.Google Scholar
Carlson, R., Fant, G. et Granström, B. (1975). Two-formant models, pitch and vowel perception. Dans: Fant, G. et Tatham, M. A. A. (dir.), Auditory Analysis and Perception of Speech. London: Academic Press, pp. 55–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chistovich, L., Fant, G. et de Serpa-Leitao, A. (1966). Mimicking and perception of synthetic vowels. Part two. STL-SPSR, 3: 1–3.Google Scholar
Chistovich, L. A. et Lublinskaya, V. V. (1979). The ‘centre of gravity’ effect in vowel spectra and critical distance between the formants: psychoacoustical study of the perception of vowel-like stimuli. Hearing Research, 1: 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chistovich, L. A., Sheikin, R. L. et Lublinskaya, V. V. (1979). ‘Centres of gravity’ and spectral peaks as the determinants of vowel quality. Dans: Lindblom, B. et Öhman, S. (dir.), Frontiers of Speech Communication Research. London: Academic Press, pp. 143–157.Google Scholar
Dang, J., Honda, K. et Suzuki, H. (1996). Morphological and acoustical analysis of the nasal and the paranasal cavities. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96: 2088–2100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delattre, P. (1954). Les attributs acoustiques de la nasalité vocalique et consonantique. Studia Linguistica VII/2: 103–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delattre, P. (1965). La nasalité vocalique en français et en anglais. The French Review, 39: 92–109.Google Scholar
Delattre, P. et Monnot, M. (1968). The role of duration in the identification of French nasal vowels. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 6: 267–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delvaux, V. (2000). Etude aérodynamique de la nasalité en français. Actes des XXIIIe Journées d'Etude sur la Parole, Aussois, pp. 141–144.Google Scholar
Delvaux, V. (2003). Contrôle et connaissance phonétique: les voyelles nasales du français. Thèse de doctorat (non publiée), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgique.Google Scholar
Delvaux, V. (2006). Production des voyelles nasales en français québécois. XXVIe Journées d'études sur la parole, Dinard, pp. 383–386.Google Scholar
Delvaux, V.(soumis). Propriétés articulatoires et acoustiques de la nasalité vocalique en français.Google Scholar
Delvaux, V., Demolin, D., Soquet, A. et Kingston, J. (2004). La perception des voyelles nasales du français. XXVèmes Journées d'étude sur la parole, Fès, pp. 157–160.Google Scholar
Delvaux, V., Metens, T. et Soquet, A. (2002). French nasal vowels: acoustic and articulatory properties. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Denver, 1: 53–56.Google Scholar
Demolin, D. et Teston, B. (1998). Aspects aérodynamiques et articulatoires des voyelles nasales du français. Travaux de l'Institut de Phonétique d'Aix, 18: 47–59.Google Scholar
Dickson, D. R. (1962). An acoustic study of nasality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 5: 103–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Cristo, A. (1980). La durée intrinsèque des voyelles du français. Travaux de l'Institut de Phonétique d'Aix, 7: 211–235.Google Scholar
Diehl, R. L., Kluender, K. R. et Walsh, M. A. (1990). Some auditory bases of speech perception and production. Dans: Ainsworth, W. A. (dir.), Advances in Speech, Hearing and Language Processing. London: JAI Press, vol.1, pp. 243–267.Google Scholar
Diehl, R. L. et Kingston, J. (1991). Phonetic covariation as auditory enhancement: The case of the [+ voice]/[− voice] distinction. Papers from the Conference on Current Phonetic Research Paradigms: Implications for Speech Motor Control, Stockholm University, August, pp. 13–16.Google Scholar
Engwall, O., Delvaux, V. et Metens, T. (2006). Interspeaker variation in the articulation of nasal vowels. Proceedings of the 7th International Seminar on Speech Production, pp. 3–10.Google Scholar
Escudier, P. et Schwartz, J.-L. (1985). Pulsation threshold test: evidence for the existence of two biases and discussion of their implications. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 78: 463–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fant, G. (1960). Acoustic Theory of Speech Production. Mouton: The Hague.Google Scholar
Fant, G. (1973). Speech Sounds and Features. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A. (1996). Listeners do hear sounds, not tongues. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99: 1730–1741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujimura, O. et Lindqvist, J. (1971). Sweep-tone measurements of vocal-tract characteristics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49: 541–558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, J. H., Ferguson, C. A. et Moravcsik, E. A (dir.). (1978). Universals of Human Language, Stanford University Press, 3 vol.Google Scholar
Green, D. M. et Swets, J. A. (1966), Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hansen, A. B. (1998). Les Voyelles nasales du français parisien moderne: aspects linguistiques, sociolinguistiques et perceptuels des changements en cours. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanem Press.Google Scholar
Hattori, S., Yamamoto, K. et Fujimura, O. (1958). Nasalization of vowels in relation to nasals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 30: 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, S. et Stevens, K. N. (1985). Acoustic and perceptual correlates of the non nasal-nasal distinction for vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77: 1560–1575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, L. L., Lotto, A. J. et Kluender, K. R. (2001). Influence of fundamental frequency on stop-consonant voicing perception: A case of learned covariation or auditory enhancement? Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109: 764–774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
House, A. S. et Stevens, K. N. (1956). Analog studies of the nasalization of vowels. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 21: 218–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huffman, M. (1990). The role of F1 amplitude in producing nasal percepts. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 88: S54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huffman, M. (1991). Time varying properties of contextually nasalized vowels: acoustics and perception. Proceedings 12th ICPhSc, Aix-en-Provence, vol.3, pp. 130–133.Google Scholar
Jha, S. K. (1986). The nasal vowels in Maithili: an acoustic study. Journal of Phonetics, 14: 223–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W. (1993). From general to language-specific capacities: The WRAPSA model of how speech perception develops. Journal of Phonetics, 21: 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W., Friederici, A. D., Wessels, J. M., Svenkerud, V. Y. et Jusczyk, A. M. (1993). Infants’ sensitivity to the sound patterns of native language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 32: 402–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawasaki, H. (1986). Phonetic explanation for phonological universals: the case of distinctive vowel nasalization. Dans: Ohala, J. J. et Jaeger, J. J. (dir.), New Experimental phonology. York: Academic Press, pp. 81–103.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D., Liss, J. et Philips, B. J. (1989). Acoustic analysis of velopharyngeal dysfunction in speech. Dans: Bzoch, K. R. (dir.), Communicative disorders related to cleft lip and palate. Boston: College-Hill Press, 3e édition, pp. 258–270.Google Scholar
Kingston, J. et Diehl, R. L. (1994). Phonetic knowledge. Language, 70: 419–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingston, J. et Macmillan, N. A. (1995). Integrality of nasalization and F1 in vowels in isolation and before oral and nasal consonants: A detection-theoretic application of the Garner paradigm. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97: 1261–1285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klatt, D. H. (1980). Software for a Cascade/Parallel Formant Syntheziser. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67: 971–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krakow, R. A., Beddor, P. S., Goldstein, L. M. et Fowler, C. (1988). Coarticulatory influences on the perceived height of nasal vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 83: 1146–1158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krakow, R. A. et Beddor, P. S. (1991). Coarticulation and the perception of nasality. Proceedings 12th ICPhS, Aix-en-Provence, vol.5, pp. 38–41.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, J. et Sundberg, J. (1976). Acoustic properties of the nasal tract. Phonetica 33: 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macmillan, N. A. et Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection Theory: A User's Guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Macmillan, N. A., Kingston, J., Thorburn, R., Dickey, A. W. et Bartels, C. (1999). Integrality of nasalization and F1. II Basic sensivity and phonetic labeling measure dinstinct sensory and decision-rule interactions, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106: 2913–2932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, I. (2006). Variation in co-variation: the search for explanatory principles. LabPhon 10. Book of abstracts.Google Scholar
Maeda, S. (1982). A digital simulation method of the vocal-tract system. Speech Communication, 1: 199–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maeda, S. (1993). Acoustics of vowel nasalization and articulatory shifts in French nasal vowels. Dans: Huffman, M. K. et Krakow, R. A. (dir.), Phonetics and Phonology, vol.5, Nasals, Nasalization and the velum. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 147–167.Google Scholar
Martin, P., Beaudoin-Begin, A.-M., Goulet, M.-J. et Roy, J.-P. (2001). Les voyelles nasales en français du Québec. La Linguistique 37: 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinet, A. (1945). La Prononciation du français contemporain: témoignages recueillis en 1941 dans un camp d'officiers prisonniers. Genève: Droz.Google Scholar
Ménard, L., Schwartz, J.-L., Boë, L.-J., Kandel, S. et Vallée, N. (2002). Auditory normalization of French vowels synthesized by an articulatory model simulating growth from birth to adulthood. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111: 1892–1905.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morin, Y-C. (1994). Quelques réflexions sur la formation des voyelles nasales en français. Dans: Van Deyck, R. (dir.), Diachronie et variation linguistique. Gent: Communication et Cognition, pp. 27–109.Google Scholar
Nève, F.-X. (1984). Auquin doute: un parfum brun s'en va. . .: la disparition du phonème /œ˜/ en français contemporain. Le Français Moderne, 52: 98–219.Google Scholar
Ohala, J. J. (1981). The listener as a source of sound change. Papers from a Parasession on Language and Behavior, Chicago Linguistics Society, pp. 178–203.Google Scholar
Ohala, J. J. (1986). Phonological evidence for top-down processing in speech perception. Dans: Perkell, J. S. et Klatt, D. H. (dir.), Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, pp. 386–397.Google Scholar
Oliveira, C. et Teixeira, A. (2007). On gestures timing in european Portuguese nasals. Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. pp. 405–408.Google Scholar
Repp, B. H. (1982). Phonetic trading relations and context effects: New experimental evidence for a speech mode of perception. Psychological Bulletin, 2: 81–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruhlen, M. (1975). Patterning of nasal vowels. Dans: Ferguson, C., Hyman, L., et Ohala, J. J. (dir.), Nasalfest: Papers from a Symposium on Nasals and Nasalization. Stanford University: Department of Linguistics, pp. 333–351.Google Scholar
Schwartz, J. L. et Escudier, P. (1987). Does the human auditory system include large-scale spectral integration? Dans: Schouten, M.E.H. (dir.), The Psychophysics of Speech Perception. Nato Asi Series, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 284–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, K. (1998). Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Straka, G. (1979). Remarques sur les voyelles nasales, leur origine et leur évolution en français. Les sons et les mots, Choix d'études de phonétique et de linguistique, Paris: Klincksieck, pp. 501–531.Google Scholar
Takeuchi, S., Kasuya, H. et Kido, K. (1975). On the acoustic correlate of nasality. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan, 31: 298–309.Google Scholar
Teixeira, A., Vaz, F. et Príncipe, J. C. (1999). Influence of dynamics in the perceived naturalness of Portuguese nasal vowels. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. et de Boysson-Bardies, B. (1994). The nature and origins of ambient language influence on infant vocal production and early words. Phonetica, 51: 159–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walter, H. (1977). La Phonologie du français. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Walter, H. (1994). Variétés actuelles des voyelles nasales du français. Dans: Van Deyck, R. (dir.), Diachronie et variation linguistique. Gent: Communication et cognition, (coll. Studies in Language), pp. 223–236.Google Scholar
Whalen, D. H. et Beddor, P. S. (1989). Connections between nasality and vowel duration and height: Elucidation of the Eastern Algonquian intrusive nasal. Language, 65: 457–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, J. T. (1986). The behavior of nasalized vowels in the perceptual vowel space. Dans: Ohala, J. J. et Jaeger, J. J. (dir.), Experimental Phonology. New York: Academic Press, pp. 45–67.Google Scholar
Young, F. W. et Hamer, R. M. (1979). Multi-dimensional scaling: history, theory and applications. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Young, F. W. et Harris, D. F. (1990). Multidimensional Scaling: Procedure ALSCAL, SPSS Base System User's Guide, pp. 396–472.Google Scholar
Zerling, J.-P. (1984). Phénomènes de nasalité et de nasalisation vocaliques: Etude cinéradiographique pour deux locuteurs. Travaux de l'Institut de Phonétique de Strasbourg, 16: 241–266.Google Scholar