A cross-linguistic study of articulatory timing in liquids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of recent studies have observed that the timing of articulatory gestures is systematically different in prevocalic versus postvocalic allophones of English liquids. In English, the more anterior (consonant-like) gestures tend to occur at the peripheries of syllables, while more posterior (vowel-like) gestures occur nearer the syllable peak. These facts have allowed for a greatly simplified account of phonological processes involving English liquids, such as ‘‘vocalization’’ of postvocalic liquids, r- or l-coloring of vowels, and ‘‘dark’’ and ‘‘light’’ allophones of /l/. However, no such studies have been made of timing in liquids of other languages. In this study, ultrasound data were collected from one to three subjects for each of English /l/ and /r/, Quebecois French /l/, Mandarin /r/, and Korean /l/. Differences in intergestural timing were measured for prevocalic versus postvocalic allophones. Results show similar timing effects to those previously observed for English, with posterior gestures occurring earlier in postvocalic allophones. This property is consistent with phonological processes, such as pre-liquid laxing, observable in these languages. Quebecois /l/ and Mandarin /r/ were also interesting in exhibiting no measurable dorsal gesture at all in their initial allophones. [Research supported by the 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".