The Emphatic and Pharyngeal Sounds in Hebrew and in Arabic

Abstract

This study addresses physiological, acoustic, and linguistic issues in the production of the emphatic sounds [in text] and the pharyngeal sounds [in text]. Approximately 300 minutes of video recordings were obtained from nine Hebrew and Arabic speakers, using a fiberscope positioned in the upper pharynx and simultaneous audio recording through an external microphone. We also studied a cineradiographic film of three Arabic speakers. Results clearly show that all the emphatic sounds, when pronounced as such, share pharyngealization as a secondary articulation. A constriction is formed between the pharyngeal walls and the tip of the epiglottis, which tilts backwards. To a lesser degree, the lower part of the root of the tongue is also retracted. The data show that all the emphatic and pharyngeal sounds we studied are made with qualitatively the same pharyngeal constriction. However, the pharyngeal constriction is more extreme and less variable for the pharyngeal sounds, where it is the primary articulation, than for the emphatic sounds, where it is a secondary articulation. Because the same sort of pharyngealization is seen for all the emphatics, we use a common notational symbol, [in text], for all of them, including [in text] in place of /q/. We note that where pharyngeals and pharyngealized sounds were realized, the Hebrew and Arabic speakers produced them in essentially the same way.

A comparison of vocal parameters in adult bilingual Hebrew-English speakers

“…Voices were recorded in a quiet room, using an iRig unidirectional microphone and an iRig recording app on the iPad as an audio recording device (25) . First, the participants were recorded while sustaining a vowel for about 10 s. Then, automatic speech samples were acquired when the participants counted from one to ten in both Hebrew and English.…”

Upper Saxon (Chemnitz dialect)

“…4 This is the counterpart of the Standard German lower-mid central vowel /ɐ/. Acoustically, pharyngealization in Upper Saxon is characterized by a significantly lowered F2 frequency and a slightly raised F3 frequency, similar to pharyngealization in other languages, such as Arabic (Obrecht 1968, Laufer & Baer 1988, McCarthy 1994, Yeou 2001, Al-Masri & Jongman 2003, among others), Hebrew (Laufer & Baer 1988), and Hongyan Qiang (Evans 2006). 5 The vowel chart reflects mean formant values collected via spectrographic analysis.…”

Revisiting acoustic correlates of pharyngealization in Jordanian and Moroccan Arabic: Implications for formal representations

“…The second term, musta˓liya (IPA: /mustaʕlija/) 'with an elevated dorsum' is used to describe these four consonants /sˤ tˤ dˤ ðˤ/ in addition to /q x ɣ/ (Cantineau, 1960;Jakobson, 1957Jakobson, /1962Khattab et al, 2006;Lehn, 1963). The difference between relatively higher first formant (F1) in the pharyngealized context (e.g., Al-Tamimi, F. Barkat-Defradas et al, 2003;Ghazeli, 1977;Jongman et al, 2011;Khattab et al, 2006;Laufer & Baer, 1988;Shahin, 1996Shahin, , 1997. The observed differences on F1 were not as consistent as those obtained for F2, and this led many researchers to consider only F2 as the main acoustic correlate to pharyngealization in Arabic (e.g., McCarthy, 1994;Watson, 2007).…”

“…Although these characteristics are mostly agreed upon, pharyngealization is also associated with a retracted epiglottis, a raised larynx, a pressed/tense voice quality, and/or a protruded lip posture (see e.g., Al-Tamimi, F. Cantineau, 1960;Hess, 1998;Laufer & Baer, 1988;Lehn, 1963;Zeroual & Clements, 2015;Zeroual et al, 2011, among others). Although located near the constriction observed for 'true' pharyngeals, authors claimed that the two, i.e., 'true' pharyngeals and pharyngealization, share the same place but vary in degree of constriction (e.g., Laufer & Baer, 1988). Hence, and following the Laryngeal Articulator Model (Esling, 2005), both will share an epilaryngeal constriction that may be exhibited differently.…”