Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, Katarzyna

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.250
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.259

CiteScore 2017: 0.36

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.151
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.485

Online
ISSN
1897-7499
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 52, Issue 3

Issues

An acoustic description of spectral and temporal characteristics of Azerbaijani vowels

Payam Ghaffarvand Mokari
  • Corresponding author
  • University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu Finland
  • General Linguistics and Language Technology University of Eastern Finland RoomAG1O1 Joensuu, 80100 Finland
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Stefan Werner
Published Online: 2016-10-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0019

Abstract

This paper presents an acoustic description of the nine Azerbaijani vowels; investigating the underlying acoustic and temporal characteristics of its vowel system. We explored acoustic and temporal parameters including: the first three formants (F1, F2 and F3), fundamental frequency (F0) and duration of the vowels. Participants in this study were 20 male and 23 female Azerbaijani speakers with a Tabrizi dialect. They were asked to utter three repetitions of the nine Azerbaijani vowels in three natural word contexts, embedded in carrier sentences. Results showed that the [ɯ] and [œ] vowels had a large overlap in the F1–F2 vowel space. Further analysis suggested that F3 is an important cue in discrimination of this vowel pair. Vowel-intrinsic duration effect seemed to be relatively strong in Azerbaijani. Other universal features also were found in the production of Azerbaijani vowels: low vowels and female speakers had lower F0 values. Surprisingly, in contrast with previous results for most languages, the average duration of Azerbaijani vowels was greater in males than females. The results of this study define the acoustic vowel-space of the Azerbaijani language and develop a database for further comparisons and investigations.

Keywords: Acoustic analysis; vowels; formants; Azerbaijani

References

  • Adank, P., R. Van Hout and R. Smits. 2004. “An acoustic description of the vowels of Northern and Southern Standard Dutch”. Journal of the A coustical Society of America?,. 1729-1738.Google Scholar

  • Bezooijen, R. van. 1995. “Sociocultural aspects of pitch differences between Japanese and Dutch women.” Language and Speech 38. 253-266.Google Scholar

  • Best, C.T. and A. Faber. 2000. “Developmental increase in infants discrimination of normative vowels that adults assimilate to a single native vowel”. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Infant Studies, Brighton, UK, 16-19 July 2000.Google Scholar

  • Boersma, P and D. Weenink. 2015. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5.4.10, retrieved 27 Jun 2015 from <http://www.praat.org/>.

  • Clopper, C.G., D. Pisoni and K. De Jong. 2005. “Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 3. 1661-1676.Google Scholar

  • Crystal, D. 2010. The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Diehl, R.L., B. Lindblom, K.A. Hoemeke and R.P. Fahey. 1996. “On explaining certain male-female differences in the phonetic realization of vowel categories”. Journal of Phonetics 24. 187-208.Google Scholar

  • Escudero, P., P. Boersma, A.S. Rauber and R.A. Bion. 2009. “A cross-dialect acoustic description of vowels: Brazilian and European Portuguese”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 3. 1379-1393.Google Scholar

  • Hagino, A., K. Inohara, Y.I. Sumita and H. Taniguchi. 2008. “Investigation of the factors influencing the outcome of prostheses on speech rehabilitation of mandibulec-tomy patients”. Nihon Hotetsu Shika Gakkai Zasshi 52(4). 543-549.Google Scholar

  • Hillenbrand, J., L. Getty, M. J. Clark and K. Wheeler. 1995. “Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 5. 3099-3111.Google Scholar

  • Johanson, L. 1988. “Code-copying in Irano-Turkic”. Language Sciences 20(3). 325-337.Google Scholar

  • Johanson, L. 2010. “Azerbaijanian”. In: Brown, K and S. Ogilvie (ed.), Concise encyclopedia of languages of the world. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 110-113.Google Scholar

  • Koopmans-Van Beinum, F. J. 1980. Vowel contrast reduction, an acoustic and perceptual study of Dutch vowels in various speech conditions. (PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.)Google Scholar

  • Lehiste, I. 1970. Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Menges, K.H. 1951. “Research in the Turkic dialects of Iran: preliminary report”. Oriens 4(1). 273-279.Google Scholar

  • Mozaffarzadeh Peivasti, S. 2012. “An acoustic analysis of Azerbaijani vowels in Tabrizi dialect”. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research 2(7). 7181-7184.Google Scholar

  • Peterson, G.E. and H.L. Barney. 1952. “Control methods used in a study of the vowels”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2. 175-184.Google Scholar

  • Prieto, P, and F. Torreira. 2007. “The segmental anchoring hypothesis revisited: Syllable structure and speech rate effects on peak timing in Spanish”. Journal of Phonetics 35(4). 473-500.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Reetz, H. and A. Jongman. 2011. Phonetics: Transcription, production, acoustics, and perception. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

  • Reubold, U., J. Harrington and F. Kleber. 2010. “Vocal aging effects on F0 and the first formant: a longitudinal analysis in adult speakers”. Speech Communication 52(7). 638-651.Google Scholar

  • Rochet, A. andB.L. Rochet. 1991. “The effect ofvowel height on patterns of assimilation nasality in French and English”. Proceedings of the 12th Int. Cong. Phonetic Sciences, Aix (vol. 3). 54-57.Google Scholar

  • Simpson, A.P. 2001. “Dynamic consequences of differences in male and female vocal tract dimensions”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 5. 2153-2164.Google Scholar

  • Simpson, A.P. “Gender-specific articulatory-acoustic relations in vowel sequences”. Journal of Phonetics 30(3). 417-435.Google Scholar

  • Simpson, A.P. and C. Ericsdotter. 2003. “Sex-specific durational differences in English and Swedish”. Proceedings of the 15th Int. Cong. Phonetic Sciences, 2003. 1113—1116.Google Scholar

  • Strange, W., A. Weber, E.S. Levy, V. Shafiro, M. Hisagi and K. Nishi. 2007. “Acoustic variability within and across German, French, and American English vowels: Phonetic context effects”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2. 1111-1129.Google Scholar

  • Wang, H. and V. Van Heuven. 2006. “Acoustical analysis of English vowels produced by Chinese, Dutch and American speakers”. Linguistics in the Netherlands 237-248.Google Scholar

  • Whalen, D.H. and A.G. Levitt. 1995. “The universality of intrinsic F0 of vowels”. Journal of Phonetics 3. 349-366.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-10-10

Published in Print: 2016-09-01


Citation Information: Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, Volume 52, Issue 3, Pages 503–518, ISSN (Online) 1897-7499, ISSN (Print) 0137-2459, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0019.

Export Citation

© Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in