Recent acoustic studies have provided evidence that /u/ (goose) and /ʊ/ (foot) have fronted in the standard accent of England in the last fifty years, but what is less clear is whether this fronting is due entirely to a repositioning of the tongue or whether it has been accompanied by an unrounding of the lips. Four experiments were carried out to shed light on this issue. An acoustic study of anticipatory coarticulation in /s/ in the first of these suggested a similar degree of lip-protrusion for young speakers whose F2 of /u/ was raised compared with that of older speakers. Compatibly, judgments of lip-rounding elicited from cross-dubbed auditory-visual stimuli and an analysis of lip movement showed young speakers' /u/ to be produced with rounded lips. Their tongue positions and movements in the final experiment were found to be almost as advanced for /u/ as for /i/ (fleece) and nearer to a central position for lax /ʊ/ (foot). Taken together, these results confirm firstly, that the diachronic shift in /u/ has involved a realignment of the tongue, but not of the lips; and secondly, that the diachronic shift in /ʊ/ is likely to be a more recent innovation than that of its tense counterpart.

This study investigates utterance-final pitch accents in declaratives in two contact languages (Catalan and Spanish) as produced by two groups of Catalan–Spanish bilinguals (Catalan-dominant and Spanish-dominant). It contributes to a growing body of research showing that bilinguals transfer the intonational patterns of their native language to their non-native language, and it provides a sociolinguistic profile of an intonational variable in a language contact situation. We also examine the interaction of native and non-native patterns within the performance of the bilinguals. Evidence is presented for the existence of a process of phonetic category assimilation of non-native pitch contrasts to native pitch contours, as well as for phonetic new-category formation in second language learning.

San Felipe Jalapa de Díaz (Jalapa) Mazatec is unusual in possessing a three-way phonation contrast and three-way level tone contrast independent of phonation. This study investigates the acoustics of how phonation and tone interact in this language, and how such interactions are maintained across variables like speaker sex, vowel timecourse, and presence of aspiration in the onset. Using a large number of words from the recordings of Mazatec made by Paul Kirk and Peter Ladefoged in the 1980s and 1990s, the results of our acoustic and statistical analysis support the claim that spectral measures like H1-H2 and mid-range spectral measures like H1-A2 best distinguish each phonation type, though other measures like Cepstral Peak Prominence are important as well. This is true regardless of tone and speaker sex. The phonation type contrasts are strongest in the first third of the vowel and then weaken towards the end. Although the tone categories remain distinct from one another in terms of F0 throughout the vowel, for laryngealized phonation the tone contrast in F0 is partially lost in the initial third. Consistent with phonological work on languages that cross-classify tone and phonation type (i.e. ‘laryngeally complex’ languages, Silverman 1997), this study shows that the complex orthogonal three-way phonation and tone contrasts do remain acoustically distinct according to the measures studied, despite partial neutralizations in any given measure.

This paper analyses clicks in naturally-occurring English conversation. It demonstrates that regardless of any paralinguistic functions clicks may undertake, their occurrence is orderly and systematic, and intimately tied to the interactional structure of talk. Specifically, clicks are shown to function alongside the phonetic parameters of pitch, articulatory segmental features and voice quality (and the sequential and lexical organisation of talk) to demarcate the onset of new and disjunctive sequences. The methodology employed combines (i) the sequential analysis techniques of Conversation Analysis with (ii) parametric impressionistic and instrumental phonetic investigations. A key feature of this methodology is the study of naturally-occurring conversation rather than intuited or laboratory speech data. The findings in this paper challenge the traditional view that clicks function only paralinguistically in English. They also highlight the fruitfulness of implementing phonetic investigations alongside interactional analyses since such an approach enables previously unobserved patterns in the phonetics-interaction interface to be identified.

Approximants that can be considered weaker versions of voiced fricatives (termed here ‘frictionless continuants’) are poorly served by the IPA in terms of symbolization as compared to semi-vowel approximants. In this paper we survey the central approximants and the symbols and diacritics used to transcribe them; we focus on evidence for the use of non-rhotic frictionless continuants in both natural language (by which we mean non-clinical varieties) and disordered speech; and we suggest some possible unitary symbols for those that currently require the use of a hard-to-read lowering diacritic beneath the symbol for the corresponding voiced fricative.

In the paper ‘The symbolization of central approximants in the IPA’, Martin Ball and Joan Rahilly approach an interesting problem – the phonetic transcription of approximants other than the so-called semivowels. In the absence of special symbols in the IPA chart, they suggest that special characters should be used for the notation of approximant realizations made at the bilabial, dental, alveolar, lamino-postalveolar, palatal, velar, uvular and pharyngeal places of articulation. In their view, the introduction of new symbols should render those sounds comparable to other non-semivowel approximants for which special symbols are available, i.e., [ʋ] (labiodental), [ɹ] (apico-postalveolar) and [ɻ] (retroflex), while, at the same time, avoiding having to add the lowered diacritic to the voiced fricative symbols [β ð z ʒ ʁ ʕ].

The idea of having a version of the IPA chart in Chinese was initiated by a group of Chinese phoneticians and dialectologists in 2006. The situation that existed at the time was that the IPA terms used in mainstream Chinese textbooks and in classrooms were still following various older versions of the chart and principles. For instance, there were no approximants in the consonant chart; instead, the Chinese translation of the term ‘frictionless continuant’ was still listed in the consonant chart. After the revised IPA chart was released in 2005, Chinese phoneticians and dialectologists considered it a good opportunity to promote the updated IPA terminology in Chinese, reflected in a Chinese version of the chart. In the winter of 2006, the Phonetic Association of China organized an advisory committee and a working committee to undertake the translation. Following some months of e-mail communications among committee members, a meeting was organized at the Institute of Linguistics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, on 7 January 2007. Five members of the advisory committee and seven members of the working committee participated in the final discussion. At the meeting in Beijing, we worked out the 2007 version of the IPA chart in Chinese that is reproduced here. This chart was first published in the first issue of the Chinese journal Fangyan 方 言 [Dialect] in 2007. The copyright symbol at the top of the chart indicates that the Chinese version is a work of the Phonetic Association of China, which is, officially speaking, a member of the Linguistic Society of China. The intention of the Association in disseminating the chart has been to unify and clarify the traditions of Chinese phonetic usage, to standardize Chinese terminology for referring to speech sounds and categories, and to communicate and promote the knowledge of IPA practices to Chinese-speaking society.

Kera is an Eastern Chadic language spoken by about 50,000 people in southwestern Chad, south of the town of Fianga, and in major towns of Cameroon and Chad. Most Kera speakers would claim to speak a standard variety of Kera although there is some variation depending on gender and location. The differences involve the relationship between tone and voicing, the number of contrastive tones and the presence or absence of a voicing contrast. Women are more conservative than men in the use of tone in rural settings and more innovative than men in urban settings (Pearce 2009). Previous literature on Kera includes Ebert (1975, 1976, 1979) and Pearce (1999, 2006a, b, c, 2007a, 2008, 2009).

Malay (Bahasa Melayu) is a member of the Malayic subgroup of the Austronesian language family. This subgroup includes languages like Gayo in Sumatra (Eades & Hajek 2006), Minangkabau in Sumatra, and Iban in Borneo, as well as many local dialects of Malay found in Borneo, Sumatra, Peninsular Malaysia, and eastern Indonesia (Adelaar 2005).