MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285014799 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n6p83

Voice Onset Time of Initial Stops in Najdi Arabic

2022· article· en· W4285014799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
F. Mohammad, Yousef F. Bader

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoice-onset timeArticulation (sociology)VoicePlace of articulationVowelArabicAffect (linguistics)AcousticsLinguisticsSpeech recognitionPsychologyComputer scienceCommunicationPhysicsConsonant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The voice onset time (VOT), which indicates the durational interval from the stop release to the start of the voicing of the following vowel, has long been a prominent research topic in the field of acoustic phonetics. It has shown to be a reliable universal acoustic parameter in discriminating the stop consonants in numerous languages, like English, German, Korean, and various Arabic varieties. It also has been claimed that other factors, such as place of articulation, gender, and vocalic contexts, may affect the productions of the VOTs of the stop categories. Therefore, the present study aims to examine the VOT values of the Najdi Arabic (NA) stops, particularly the plain stop consonants /b, d, g, t, k/, and the potential effects of the place of articulation, gender, and vocalic contexts on their production. Sixty male and female native NA speakers were recruited in this study. The findings revealed that NA has two types of VOTs: positive VOTs with the voiceless stops and negative VOTs with the voiced stops. They also showed that the VOTs of the NA stops become longer when the articulators move back to the oral cavity and shorter in the front cavity. Lastly, the findings reported that the VOTs with short vowels are significantly shorter than the VOTs with long vowels and that gender does not affect the VOTs of the voiced stops, but does affect the VOTs of their voiceless counterparts. Hopefully, the conclusions reached in this study contribute to a better understanding of this interesting acoustic parameter and to the less acoustic literature on Arabic and its various varieties.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English Language→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→