MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2346465524 · doi:10.1121/1.4950627

The acoustics of strengthened glides in Kirundi

2016· article· en· W2346465524 on OpenAlexaff
Alexei Kochetov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObstruentVowelVoiceNasalizationNasalityFormantContext (archaeology)Duration (music)Voice-onset timeAcousticsMathematicsPrefixConsonantLinguisticsSpeech recognitionPsychologyComputer sciencePhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strengthening of post-consonantal glides /w/ and /j/ to obstruents or nasals is cross-linguistically uncommon, especially when the process is synchronically conditioned. This study investigates acoustic correlates of post-consonantal glide strengthening in Kirundi, an eastern Bantu language spoken in Burundi. The materials included words with /w/ or /j/ preceded by labial obstruent or nasal consonants /p, b, v, m/—the contexts that have been previously described to trigger the process. The morphological context was also varied, with sequences occurring at prefix-root or suffix-root boundaries, or within a root. Four female and four male native speakers produced the word list in a carrier sentence three times. The analysis involved phonetic classification of strengthened glides, as well as their duration and spectral measurements (frication/burst spectra and following vowel formants). The results showed that the post-consonantal /w/ was consistently realized as an oral or nasal stop agreeing with the preceding consonant in voicing and nasality, consistently with previous descriptive accounts. The realization of the post-consonantal /j/, however, was considerably more variable across and within speakers, ranging from a palatal stop or nasal to a weakly fricated/nasalized glide, and showing some sensitivity to morphological structure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→