End-state comfort governs kinematic variation in English flap/tap sequences.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Derrick & Gick [Can. Acoust. 36(3), 162 (2008)] found that North American English flap/tap singletons are produced using up to four phonetically conditioned kinematic variants (up-flaps, down-flaps, postalveolar taps, and alveolar taps), dependent on the position of the tongue tip in neighboring rhotic and nonrhotic vowels. Our pilot work has shown that sequences of multiple flap/tap variants are highly mechanically interdependent (e.g., subjects never produce two up-flaps or two down-flaps in adjacent syllables). The present study tests flap/tap sequences for compliance with “end-state comfort” [Rosenbaum et al., Acta Psychologica 94, 59 (1996)], as evidence for look-ahead planning. Twelve subjects’ tongue positions were measured during production of English words and word pairs with one- and two-flap sequences. Results show that sequences of flaps end with a preferred tongue tip position. For example, for 11 subjects, the /d/ of “edit” is realized as an alveolar tap or down-flap in “edit the,” but an up-flap in “edit a,” both facilitating ending the sequence with a low tongue position. A general avoidance of a sequence-final up-flap was also observed, such that /d/ of “edify” is an alveolar-tap or down-flap, while, for eight subjects, “editor” shows an up-flap, postalevolar tap sequence. [Work supported by NSERC.]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".