Abstract
The effect of ability in a tonal language on shifting cue weights in a non-tonal language is explored through a production and perception experiment carried out with speakers of Kuy (Katuic, Austroasiatic) in Ban Khi Nak, Sisaket Province, in Northeast Thailand. Specifically, the realization of a modal-breathy voice quality contrast is analyzed through observing the effects of language ability and usage-related sociolinguistic factors. The results show increased usage of F0 and CPP cues in production and of F0 cues in perception of the voice quality contrast with greater ability and usage of a tonal language. Tonal language ability and usage also affects other acoustic correlates of voice quality, but does not uniformly weaken them. Degree of integration into Thai society shows mixed effects, only somewhat correlating with decay of voice quality cues. The results have bearing on the role of larger national and regional languages in restructuring of phonological contrasts and in phonological attrition, and provide insight into the relationship between multilingualism and sound change.
Funding source: American Philosophical Society
Funding source: Oswalt Endangered Languages Grant
Acknowledgments
I would like to extend special thanks to all the Kuy speakers I worked with in Tambon Tum, especially Thongwilai Intanai and Sidawun Chaiyapha, without whom my work would not have been possible. I am also highly indebted to my mentees: Margaret Asperheim, Bethany Auclair, Renee Cong, Nicole Kim, Jenkin Leung, Melissa Milligan, Geetanshi Sharma, Melody Tran, Stacey Vu, Crystal Wang, Ivori White, and Cynthia Zhong for their tremendous hard work in annotating data for this project. Many thanks to Susan Lin, Andrew Garrett, Justin Davidson, Ron Sprouse, Isaac Bleaman, Pittayawat Pittayaporn, Suwilai Premsrirat, Marc Brunelle, James Kirby, Ryan Gehrmann, Sujinat Jitwiriyanont, Kumaree Laparporn, Atcharaporn Thawornpat, Meng Yang, Qingyang Wang, and Pisut Thongtan for help at various stages in this research and to the audiences in Berkeley Linguistics’ Phorum group and at LabPhon 17 for feedback on earlier versions of this work. Finally, I am extremely grateful to Christian DiCanio and two anonymous reviewers for detailed and thoughtful comments. I am greatly honored to be learning on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded lands of the Ohlone people.
-
Research funding: This research was funded by the Oswalt Endangered Languages Grant from the Linguistics Department at the University of California, Berkeley (https://doi.org/10.13039/100006978) and the Lewis and Clark Fund for Exploration and Field Research from the American Philosophical Society (https://doi.org/10.13039/100013069). This research was approved by the Committee for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of California, Berkeley, including signatures of informed consent for collection of audio data. The research presents no more than minimal risk to and does not adversely affect the rights and welfare of subjects.
Appendix A: Stimuli in Experiment 1
Production Stimuli.
| Targets | Gloss | Distractors | Gloss |
|---|---|---|---|
| nchu:n | ‘to hide’ | buʔ | ‘to sow’ |
| c
|
‘to send’ | ncε: | ‘louse’ |
| ŋkε:ŋ | ‘waist’ | nchɑ:ʔ | ‘hay’ |
| k
|
‘side’ | nchɔʔ | ‘smelly’ |
| ku: | ‘to exist’ | cntr
|
‘diligent’ |
| k
|
‘every’ | c
|
‘tiger’ |
| lɑp | ‘to return’ | d
|
‘to bite (and break)’ |
| l
|
‘dusk’ | daʔ | ‘to place’ |
| lu: | ‘to howl’ | khal | ‘scooping bowl’ |
| l
|
‘thigh’ | k
|
‘tree’ |
| pho:m | ‘fragrant’ | kho:kho: | ‘toasted rice’ |
|
mp
|
‘just (now)’ | k
|
‘cow’ |
| pi:l | ‘flower’ | kt
|
‘season’ |
| p
|
‘to wind’ |
ŋk
|
‘eggplant’ |
| po:t | ‘swelling’ | lmpa: ʔ | ‘shoulder’ |
| p
|
‘too much’ |
mp
|
‘mother’ |
| pu:? | ‘sun’ | phlɯ:m | ‘lightning’ |
| p
|
‘beard’ | rmp
|
‘stick’ |
| taʔ | ‘to grab (from above)’ | sεh | ‘horse’ |
| t
|
‘to place under’ | s
|
‘five’ |
| tah | ‘to divorce’ | sŋki:l | ‘sensitive’ |
| t
|
‘to slap’ | tmpo:m | ‘that which is wrapped’ |
| the: | ‘jar’ | ntɔ:l | ‘star’ |
| (n)te: | ‘to tell’ | ntrɑ:ŋ | ‘red ant’ |
| t
|
‘no’ | thrε: | ‘rice paddy’ |
| ti: | ‘old’ |
ntr
|
‘egg’ |
| t
|
‘tall’ |
ntr
|
‘shovel’ |
| to:ŋ | ‘coconut’ | ||
| t
|
‘male (animal)’ | ||
| t(i
|
‘west’ | ||
| tp
|
‘six’ |
Social factor correlation matrix for production experiment.
| Age | √(Years Away) | Understand | Speak | Overall Freq | Family Freq | Friend Freq | ID | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1.00 | |||||||
| √(Years Away) | −0.13 | 1.00 | ||||||
| Understand | 0.51 | 0.07 | 1.00 | |||||
| Speak | 0.41 | 0.07 | 0.61 | 1.00 | ||||
| Overall Freq | 0.33 | −0.07 | 0.29 | 0.53 | 1.00 | |||
| Family Freq | −0.12 | −0.07 | −0.11 | 0.16 | 0.30 | 1.00 | ||
| Friend Freq | 0.55 | −0.25 | 0.39 | 0.44 | 0.65 | 0.09 | 1.00 | |
| ID | 0.05 | −0.09 | −0.04 | 0.17 | 0.22 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 1.00 |
Appendix B: Stop voice onset time differences
Figure A1 shows the distributions of the VOT values for unaspirated stops before modal vowels (n = 1,937, µ = 16.89, σ = 8.68), aspirated stops before modal vowels (n = 342, µ = 66.33, σ = 31.13), and stops before breathy vowels (n = 2,263, µ = 26.75, σ = 15.86). Differences between all three groups are significant (F2,4539 = 1,557, p < 0.001). Aspiration is neutralized before breathy vowels, with this analysis showing that the VOT is closer to pre-modal unaspirated stops (+9.86 ms) than to pre-modal aspirated stops (−39.58 ms). However, the results should be taken with caution as there are only three aspirated target words.
Boxplot of VOT distributions by consonant type.
Appendix C: PCA on social variables (Experiment 1)
The factors fed into the social variable PCA are in the correlation matrix in Table A2. These factors are explained below. The questions from which they are derived may be seen in Appendix G. The first component of the PCA accounts for 36.7% of the variance, comprising primarily of Friend Freq (22.37%), Speak (21.08%), Overall Freq (19.86%), Age (17.39%), and Understand (16.37%). A scree plot of the percentage of variance accounted for by each dimension is in Figure A2 and contributions of the social factors to the first dimension (Kuy Experience) are in Figure A3. Lower dimensions were unused because of difficulty of interpretability.
Age: Participant’s age in years.
√(Years Away): Years spent living in another (non-Kuy speaking) area. Square rooted to reduce heavy right skew.
Understand: Ability to understand Kuy (coded from 0 to 4) minus ability to understand Thai or Lao (coded from 0 to 4; the higher ranking between the two languages is chosen).
Speak: Ability to speak Kuy (coded from 0 to 4) minus ability to speak Thai or Lao (coded from 0 to 4; the higher ranking between the two languages is chosen).
Overall Freq: Overall frequency of using Kuy (coded from 0 to 100) minus overall frequency of using Thai or Lao (coded from 0 to 100; the higher number between the two languages is chosen).
Family Freq: Frequency of using Kuy with family (coded from 0 to 100) minus frequency of using Thai or Lao with family (coded from 0 to 100; the higher number between the two languages is chosen).
Friend Freq: Frequency of using Kuy with friends (coded from 0 to 100) minus frequency of using Thai or Lao with friends (coded from 0 to 100; the higher number between the two languages is chosen).
ID: Self-rating of Kuy identity (coded from 0 to 3) minus self-rating of Thai or Lao identity (coded from 0 to 3; the higher number between the two languages is chosen).
Voice quality factor correlation matrix for production experiment.
| H1* –A1* | H1* –A2* | H1* –A3* | H1* | H1* –H2* | CPP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1*–A1* | 1.00 | |||||
| H1*–A2* | 0.69 | 1.00 | ||||
| H1*–A3* | 0.58 | 0.56 | 1.00 | |||
| H1* | 0.40 | 0.44 | 0.51 | 1.00 | ||
| H1*–H2* | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.11 | 0.47 | 1.00 | |
| CPP | 0.06 | −0.13 | 0.15 | 0.19 | −0.20 | 1.00 |
Scree plot for PCA on social variables.
Contributions of social variables to Dimension 1 (Kuy Experience).
Appendix D: PCA on voice quality variables (Experiment 1)
The factors fed into the voice quality PCA are in the correlation matrix in Table A3. These factors are explained below (an asterisk indicates correction via formulas by Iseli et al. (2007)). The first component of the PCA accounts for 45.34% of the variance, comprising primarily of H1*–A2* (25.09%), H1*–A1* (24.03%), H1*–A3* (23.30%), and H1* (21.07%). A scree plot of the percentage of variance accounted for by each dimension is in Figure A4 and contributions of the voice quality factors to the first dimension (H1*(–An*)) are in Figure A5. Lower dimensions were unused because of difficulty of interpretability or being primarily loaded on by one factor.
H1*–A1*: Amplitude of the first harmonic minus amplitude of the loudest harmonic of the first formant, corrected; measure of spectral tilt.
H1*–A2*: Amplitude of the first harmonic minus amplitude of the loudest harmonic of the second formant, corrected; measure of spectral tilt.
H1*–A3*: Amplitude of the first harmonic minus amplitude of the loudest harmonic of the third formant, corrected; measure of spectral tilt.
H1*: Amplitude of the first harmonic, corrected.
H1*–H2*: Amplitude of the first harmonic minus amplitude of the second harmonic, corrected; correlate of open quotient.
CPP: Cepstral peak prominence; measure of degree of periodicity and correlated with harmonics-to-noise ratio.
Perception stimuli Klatt parameters.
| taʔ | ti: | |
|---|---|---|
| p1 (Power 1) | 1 | 1 |
| p2 (Power 2) | 10 | 3 |
| VOT | 10 ms | 15 ms |
| Duration | 200 ms | 400 ms |
| F1 begins at | 800 Hz | 350 Hz |
| F1 ends at | 900 Hz | 425 Hz |
| Midpoint F0 | 125 Hz | 135 Hz |
Scree plot for PCA on voice quality variables.
Contributions of voice quality variables to Dimension 1 (H1*(–An*))
Appendix E: Stimuli in Experiment 2
In Table A4 are some relevant settings for the current stimuli. Readers may request the Praat script from the author. Stimuli were modified following multiple rounds of piloting until they were considered natural by listeners and until there was not a heavy bias towards modal or breathy responses. A VOT of 20 ms was originally used for both syllables as an intermediate value between the VOT of unaspirated stops preceding modal vowels and stops preceding breathy vowels, but this value led to a heavy bias towards breathy responses. As such, the VOT was reduced following the guidance of pilot participants.
Social factor correlation matrix for perception experiment.
| Age | √(Years Away) | Understand | Speak | Overall Freq | Family Freq | Friend Freq | ID | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 1.00 | |||||||
| √(Years Away) | −0.26 | 1.00 | ||||||
| Understand | 0.54 | −0.16 | 1.00 | |||||
| Speak | 0.37 | −0.04 | 0.44 | 1.00 | ||||
| Overall Freq | 0.41 | −0.11 | 0.33 | 0.40 | 1.00 | |||
| Family Freq | 0.13 | −0.06 | 0.17 | 0.36 | 0.41 | 1.00 | ||
| Friend Freq | 0.61 | −0.13 | 0.43 | 0.41 | 0.66 | 0.25 | 1.00 | |
| ID | 0.13 | −0.27 | 0.14 | 0.09 | 0.29 | 0.24 | 0.13 | 1.00 |
Appendix F: PCA on social variables (Experiment 2)
The factors fed into the social variable PCA are in the correlation matrix in Table A5. These factors are explained in Appendix C. The questions from which they are derived may be seen in Appendix G. The PCA revealed the first component accounting for 39.5% of the variance, comprising primarily of Friend Freq (20.31%), Overall Freq (18.80%), Age (17.48%), Understand (14.63%), and Speak (13.97%) and the second component accounting for 14.67% of the variance, comprising primarily of ID (46.33%) and Square Root Years Away (37.88%). A scree plot of the percentage of variance accounted for by each dimension is in Figure A6. Contributions of the social factors to the first (Kuy Experience) and second (Thai Integration) dimensions are in Figures A8 and A9 and the coordinates of each factor on the first two dimensions may be found in Figure A7, showing their orthogonality. Lower dimensions were unused because of difficulty of interpretability.
Scree plot for PCA on social variables.
Social factor contributions to dimensions 1 and 2
Contributions of social variables to Dimension 1 (Kuy Experience).
Contributions of social variables to Dimension 2 (Thai integration).
Appendix G: Demographic questionnaire (translated to English)
References
Abramson, Arthur S. 2004. Toward prosodic contrast: Suai and Pattani Malay. In The international symposium on tonal aspects of languages: With emphasis on tone languages, Beijing, China, 28–31 March.Search in Google Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S., Theraphan L-Thongkum & Patrick W. Nye. 2004. Voice register in Suai (Kuai): An analysis of perceptual and acoustic data. Phonetica 61. 147–171. https://doi.org/10.1159/000082561.Search in Google Scholar
Abramson, Arthur S., Mark K. Tiede & Theraphan Luangthongkum. 2015. Voice register in Mon: Acoustics and electroglottography. Phonetica 72(4). 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1159/000441728.Search in Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.Search in Google Scholar
Biever, Dawn M. & Diane M. Bless. 1989. Vibratory characteristics of the vocal folds in young adult and geriatric women. Journal of Voice 3(2). 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0892-1997(89)80138-9.Search in Google Scholar
Birdsong, David, Libby M. Gertken & Mark Amengual. 2012. Bilingual language profile: An easy-to-use instrument to assess bilingualism. University of Texas at Austin: COERLL. https://sites.la.utexas.edu/bilingual (accessed 28 August 2020).Search in Google Scholar
Bishop, Jason & Patricia Keating. 2012. Perception of pitch location within a speaker’s range: Fundamental frequency, voice quality and speaker sex. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 132(2). 1100–1112. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4714351.Search in Google Scholar
Brunelle, Marc. 2009. Contact-induced change? Register in three Cham dialects. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 2. 1–22.Search in Google Scholar
Brunelle, Marc & James Kirby. 2020. Relative cue weighting in the production and perception of register. In Laboratory phonology, Vol. 17. University of British Columbia (virtual), 6–8 July.Search in Google Scholar
Chang, Charles B. 2010. First language phonetic drift during second language acquisition. University of California, Berkeley Dissertation.10.5070/P794F9Q5V7Search in Google Scholar
Chang, Kun. 1972. The reconstruction of Proto-Miao-Yao tones. Academia Sinica/Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology. 44(4). 541–628.Search in Google Scholar
van Coetsem, Frans. 1988. Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris Publications.10.1515/9783110884869Search in Google Scholar
Coetzee, Andries W., Patrice Speeter Beddor, Kerby Shedden, Will Styler & Wissing Daan. 2018. Plosive voicing in Afrikaans: Differential cue weighting and tonogenesis. Journal of Phonetics 66. 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2017.09.009.Search in Google Scholar
Diffloth, Gérard. 1982. Registres, dévoisement, timbres vocaliques: leur histoire en Katouique. Mon-Khmer Studies 11. 47–82.Search in Google Scholar
Esposito, Christina M. 2012. An acoustic and electroglottographic study of White Hmong tone and phonation. Journal of Phonetics 40(3). 466–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.02.007.Search in Google Scholar
Ferlus, Michel. 1979. Formation des registres et mutations consonantiques dans les langues Mon-Khmer. Mon-Khmer Stuies 8. 1–76.Search in Google Scholar
Flege, James Emil. 1987. The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics 15(1). 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0095-4470(19)30537-6.Search in Google Scholar
Fox, John & Jangman Hong. 2009. Effect displays in R for multinomial and proportional-odds logit models: Extensions to the effects package. Journal of Statistical Software 32(1). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v032.i01.Search in Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew & Keith Johnson. 2013. Phonetic bias in sound change. In Alan C. Yu (ed.), Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization, 51–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.003.0003Search in Google Scholar
Gehrmann, Ryan & James Kirby. 2019. The register phenomenon across Kuay dialects: Analysis of the Huffman Katuic Audio Archives Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (SEALS), 29.Search in Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew. 2008. Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Statistics in Medicine 27(15). 2865–2873. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3107.Search in Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew & Yu-Sung Su. 2020. Arm: Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. R package version 1.11-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=arm.Search in Google Scholar
Hanson, Helen M. 1995. Glottal characteristics of female speakers. Harvard University Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Hanson, Helen M. 1997. Glottal characteristics of female speakers: Acoustic correlates. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101(1). 466–481. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.417991.Search in Google Scholar
Hanson, Helen M. & Erika S. Chuang. 1999. Glottal characteristics of male speakers: Acoustic correlates and comparison with female data. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106(2). 1064–1077. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.427116.Search in Google Scholar
Haudricourt, André-George. 1954. De l’origine des tons en viêtnamien. Journal Asiatique 242. 69–82.Search in Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne. 1991. Takic and Yuman: A study in phonological convergence. International Journal of American Linguistics 57(2). 133–157. https://doi.org/10.1086/ijal.57.2.3519764.Search in Google Scholar
Holmberg, Eva B., Robert E. Hillman, Joseph S. Perkell, Peter C. Guiod & Susan L. Goldman. 1995. Comparisons among aerodynamic, electroglottographic, and acoustic spectral measures of female voice. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 38(6). 1212–1223. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3806.1212.Search in Google Scholar
Huffman, Franklin E. 1976. The register problem in fifteen Mon-Khmer languages. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications, 13, 575–589. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 1976. Phonologization. In Alphonse G. Juilland (ed.), Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, Vol. 2, 407–418. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Search in Google Scholar
Iseli, Markus, Yen-Liang Shue & Abeer Alwan. 2007. Age, sex, and vowel dependencies of acoustic measures related to the voice source. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121(4). 2283–2295. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2697522.Search in Google Scholar
Kang, Yoonjung. 2014. Voice onset time merger and development of tonal contrast in Seoul Korean stops: A corpus study. Journal of Phonetics 45. 76–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2014.03.005.Search in Google Scholar
Keating, Patricia, Christina M. Esposito, Marc Garellek, Sameer ud Dowla Khan & Jianjing Kuang. 2010. Phonation contrasts across languages. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 108. 188–202.Search in Google Scholar
Khan, Sameer ud Dowla. 2012. The phonetics of contrastive phonation in Gujarati. Journal of Phonetics 40(6). 780–795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2012.07.001.Search in Google Scholar
Kirby, James & Marc Brunelle. 2017. Southeast Asian tone in areal perspective. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of areal linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781107279872.027Search in Google Scholar
Kirby, James P. 2014. Incipient tonogenesis in Phnom Penh Khmer: Acoustic and perceptual studies. Journal of Phonetics 43. 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2014.02.001.Search in Google Scholar
Klatt, Dennis H. & Laura C. Klatt. 1990. Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female and male talkers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 87(2). 820–857. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.398894.Search in Google Scholar
Kreiman, Jody, Bruce R. Gerratt & Norma Antoñanzas-Barroso. 2007. Measures of the glottal source spectrum. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 50(3). 595–610. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/042).Search in Google Scholar
Kuang, Jianjing. 2011. Phonation contrast in two register contrast languages and its influence on vowel quality and tone. In Proceedings of the 17th international congress of phonetics sciences, 1146–1149.Search in Google Scholar
Larish, Michael D. 1997. Moklen-Moken phonology: Mainland or Insular Southeast Asian typology. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Austronesian linguistics, 125–150.Search in Google Scholar
Lee, Seung Jin, YoonHee Cho, Ji Yeon Song, DamHee Lee, Yunjung Kim & HyangHee Kim. 2015. Aging effect on Korean female voice: Acoustic and perceptual examinations of breathiness. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 67(6). 300–307. https://doi.org/10.1159/000445290.Search in Google Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1948. The distribution of initials and tones in the Sui language. Language 24(2). 160–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/409796.Search in Google Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1966. The relationship between tones and initials in Tai. In H. Normal Zide (ed.), Studies in Comparative. Austroasiatic Linguistics, 82–88.Search in Google Scholar
Linville, Sue Ellen. 1992. Glottal gap configurations in two age groups of women. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 35(6). 1209–1215. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3506.1209.Search in Google Scholar
Linville, Sue Ellen. 2002. Source characteristics of aged voice assessed from long-term average spectra. Journal of Voice 16(4). 472–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0892-1997(02)00122-4.Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Liquan & René Kager. 2015. Bilingual exposure influences infant VOT perception. Infant Behavior and Development 38. 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2014.12.004.Search in Google Scholar
Llanos, Fernando, Olga Dmitrieva, Amanda Shultz & Alexander L. Francis. 2013. Auditory enhancement and second language experience in Spanish and English weighting of secondary voicing cues. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 134(3). 2213–2224. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4817845.Search in Google Scholar
Maran, Laraw. 1973. On becoming a tone language: a Tibeto-Burman model of tonogenesis. Consonant Types and Tone, Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1. 98–114.Search in Google Scholar
Markowski, Linda Marie. 2005. A comparative study of Kuy varieties in Cambodia. Chiang Mai: Payap University MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Maspero, Henri. 1912. Étude sur la phonétique historique de la langue annamite: Les initiales. Bulletin de l’Ecole Française d’Extreme-Orient 12(1). 1–124. https://doi.org/10.3406/befeo.1912.2713.Search in Google Scholar
Maspong, Sireemas, Francesco Burroni, Pimthip Kochaiyaphum & Pittayawat Pittayaporn. 2020. Interaction of initial geminates and stress: a case study of Pattani Malay. In Laboratory phonology, Vol. 17. University of British Columbia (virtual), 6–8 July.Search in Google Scholar
Mathôt, Sebastiaan, Daniel Schreij & Theeuwes Jan. 2012. OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods 44(2). 314–324. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428–011–0168–7.10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7Search in Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2001. Genetic versus contact relationship: prosodic diffusibility in South-East Asian languages. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: Problems in comparative linguistics, 291–327. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Michaud, Alexis. 2012. Monosyllabicization: patterns of evolution in Asian languages. In Thomas Stolz, Nau Nicole & Cornelia Stroh (eds.), Monosyllables: From phonology to typology, 115–130. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.10.1524/9783050060354.115Search in Google Scholar
Nolan, Francis. 2003. Intonational equivalence: an experimental evaluation of pitch scales. In Proceedings of the 15th international congress of phonetic sciences, Vol. 771, 774. Spain: International Phonetic Association Barcelona.Search in Google Scholar
Phimjun, Thitiporn. 2004. การศึกษาเปรียบเทียบคำศัพท์และทัศนคติระหว่างผู้พูด ภาษากูย, กวย, และเญอ ในจังหวัดศรีสะเกษ (A comparative study of lexical items and attitudes of Kuy, Kuay and Nyeu Speakers in Sisaket Province). Mahidol University MA Thesis .Search in Google Scholar
Phromthong, Sa-ard. 1996. The relationship between language use and language attitude in Kuy community in Uthumphornphisai, Srisaket. Mahidol University Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Pratankiet, Panitha. 2001. ระบบเสียงวรรณยุกต์ในภาษาไทยอีสานที่พูดโดยคนไทยอีสาน เขมร และกูย ในชุมชนบ้านท่าคอยนาง ตำบลสวาย อำเภอปรางค์กู่ จังหวัดศรีสะเกษ (The Tonal System of Northeastern Thai as spoken by Native Northeasterners, Khmer and Kui of Tha Koi-nang Village, Sawai Sub-district). Thammasat University MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Premsrirat, Suwilai. 2001. Tonogenesis in Khmu dialects of SEA. Mon-Khmer Studies 31. 47–56.Search in Google Scholar
Premsrirat, Suwilai. 2006. Thailand: Language situation. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd edn., 642–644. Oxford: Elsevier Science & Technology.10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/01705-3Search in Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm. 2007. Calquing and metatypy. Journal of Language Contact 1(1). 116–143. https://doi.org/10.1163/000000007792548341.Search in Google Scholar
Sancier, Michele L. & Carol A. Fowler. 1997. Gestural drift in a bilingual speaker of Brazilian Portuguese and English. Journal of Phonetics 25(4). 421–436. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1997.0051.Search in Google Scholar
Sangmeen, Sa-ing. 1992. ภาษากูย (ส่วย) ที่ตำบลเย้ยปราสาท อำเภอหนองกี่ จังหวัดบุรีรัมย์ (The Kooy Language of Tambon Yoeyprasat, Amphoe Nong Ki, Buri Rum). Silpakorn University MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Schertz, Jessamyn, Taehong Cho, Andrew Lotto & Natasha Warner. 2015. Individual differences in phonetic cue use in production and perception of a non-native sound contrast. Journal of Phonetics 52. 183–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2015.07.003.Search in Google Scholar
Schertz, Jessamyn & Emily J. Clare. 2020. Phonetic cue weighting in perception and production. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 11(2). e1521. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1521.Search in Google Scholar
Shue, Yen-L., Patricia Keating & Chad Vicenik. 2011. VoiceSauce: A program for voice analysis [computer program]. In Proceedings of the ICPhS, Vol. XVII, 1846–1849.Search in Google Scholar
Sipipattanakun, Witchaya. 2014. วรรณยุกต์ภาษาไทยอีสาน จังหวัดศรีสะเกษ ใน 5 ชุมนุมภาษา (Northeastern Thai tones in five speech communities in Changwat Sisaket). Chulalongkorn University MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Smalley, William A. 1994. Linguistic diversity and national unity: Language ecology in Thailand. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sriwises, Prasert. 1978. พจนานุกรมกูย(ส่วย)-ไทย-อังกฤษ Kui (Suai)-Thai-English dictionary. Bangkok: Indigenous Languages of Thailand Research Project. Chulalongkorn University Language Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Stewart, Jesse, Felicity Meakins, Cassandra Algy & Angelina Joshua. 2018. The development of phonological stratification: Evidence from stop voicing perception in Gurindji Kriol and Roper Kriol. Journal of Language Contact 11(1). 71–112. https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-01101003.Search in Google Scholar
Sukgasame, Preecha. 2003. การแปรและการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางเสียงในภาษากวย-กูย(ส่วย) [phonological variation and change in Kuai-Kui (Suai)]. Chulalongkorn University Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Suwannaraj, Taweeporn. 1990. The Phonology of the Nyeu Language. Mahidol University MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520912793Search in Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 1996. Language contact and the directionality of internal drift: the development of tones and registers in Chamic. Language 13. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/416792.Search in Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2006. Sociolinguistics and Contact-induced Language Change: Hainan Cham, Anong, and Phan Rang Cham. In Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 17–20.Search in Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2020a. Sociolinguistic, Sociological, and Sociocultural Approaches to Contact-Induced Language Change: Identifying Chamic Child Bilingualism in Contact-Based Language Change. In Anthony P. Grant (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact, 173–192. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945092.013.7Search in Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2020b. Tonogenesis: Register > Tones > Tone Realignment. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics 2. 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118732168.ch3.Search in Google Scholar
Tomioka, Yutaka. 2019. Language attitudes towards Kuay and Bru: Case studies in Surin and Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand. In 8th International Conference on Austroasiatic Languages.Search in Google Scholar
Tremblay, Annie, Jui Namjoshi, Elsa Spinelli, Mirjam Broersma, Taehong Cho, Sahyang Kim, Maria Teresa Martínez-García & Katrina Connell. 2017. Experience with a second language affects the use of fundamental frequency in speech segmentation. PLoS ONE 12(7). e0181709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181709.Search in Google Scholar
Weenink, David. 2009. The KlattGrid speech synthesizer. Interspeech 10. 2059–2062.10.21437/Interspeech.2009-591Search in Google Scholar
Whalen, Doug & Joyce McDonough. 2015. Taking the Laboratory into the Field. Annual Review of Linguistics 1. 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-124915.Search in Google Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2005. Contact-induced changes: Classification and processes. Diachronica 22(2). 373–427. https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.22.2.05win.Search in Google Scholar
Yantreesingh, Pailin. 1980. The phonology of the Kuay language of Suphanburi with comparison to the Kuy language of Surin. Bangkok: Mahidol University MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0042).
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
