Dialectal variation in affricate place of articulation in Korean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The place of articulation (POA) of Korean affricates has been a topic of much discussion in Korean linguistics. The traditional view is that the affricates were dental in the 15th century and then changed to a posterior coronal place in most dialects of Korean but the anterior articulation is retained in major dialects of North Korea, most notably Phyengan and Yukjin. However, recent instrumental studies on Seoul Korean and some impressionistic descriptions of North Korean dialects cast doubt on the validity of this traditional view. Our study examines the POA of /c/ (lenis affricate) and /s/ (anterior fricative) before /a/ in Seoul Korean (26 younger and 32 older speakers) and in two North Korean varieties, as spoken by ethnic Koreans in China (14 Phyengan and 21 Yukjin speakers). The centre of gravity of the frication noise of /c/ and /s/ was examined. The results show that in both North Korean varieties, both sibilants are produced as anterior coronal and comparable in their POA. In Seoul Korean, while the POA contrast shows a significant interaction with age and gender, the affricate is consistently and substantially more posterior than the anterior fricative across all speaker groups. The results support the traditional description.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".