Oral and nasal airflow in nasalized laryngeal consonants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it has long been known that laryngeal consonants do not block nasal harmony, it has been debated whether the velum actually remains lowered during the production of glottals in nasal harmony contexts. Using newly collected nasal and oral airflow data from two Amazonian languages, Maihki (Tukanoan, Peru) and Piaroa (Jodi¨-Sáliban, Venezuela and Colombia), we demonstrate that the laryngeals [h, ʔ] are, in fact, produced as nasalized [h̃ , ̃ ʔ] in these languages when they occur in nasal harmony spans. We observe that nasal flow is greater for both intervocalic [h] and [ʔ] in a nasal harmony context than in a non-harmony (oral) context, suggesting a lowered velum for both segments conditioned by the nasal harmony span. The glottal stops examined lack complete closure, as indicated by their non-zero oral flow; we consider the implications of this for the relationship between glottal stricture and measured nasality. [Work supported by U.S. National Science Foundation Award #1918064.]
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".