An Articulatory, Acoustic, and Auditory Study of Burmese Tone

453 Pages·2011·14.81 MB·English

AN ARTICULATORY, ACOUSTIC, AND AUDITORY STUDY
OF BURMESE TONE

A Dissertation
Submitted to the Faculty of the
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
of Georgetown University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in Linguistics

By
James Frederick Gruber, M.S.

Washington, D.C.
June 15, 2011
© 2011 James Gruber
ii
AN ARTICULATORY, ACOUSTIC, AND AUDITORY STUDY
OF BURMESE TONE

James Frederick Gruber, M.S.
Thesis Advisor: Elizabeth Zsiga, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT

This dissertation investigates the complex tonal contrast in the modern Burmese
language. The four Burmese tones are reported to make multi-way distinctions in pitch,
phonation, duration, intensity, vowel quality, and syllable structure, but the literature is
frequently conflicted about the association of these qualities with each tone. Bradley
(1982) has described Burmese as a register, rather than tonal, language due to the
bundling of prosodic qualities headlined by contrastive phonation types. However,
contrastive phonation in Burmese has eluded detection in numerous instrumental
phonetic studies (Thein Tun 1982, Ladefoged et al 1988, Watkins 1997). Production and
perception experiments were conducted in order to first clarify the phonetic description,
and in turn build a phonological model of the contrast.
Audio, electroglottographic, and aerodynamic recordings of ten native speakers
were collected and analyzed for Duration, F0, and Phonation type (as measured by Open
Quotient of the glottal waveform, rates of oral airflow, and spectral tilt – all measured
dynamically over the syllable rhyme). The perception experiment studied the forced-
choice listener identifications of stimuli re-synthesized to controlled levels of each
dimension.
iii
Major findings include (a) the contrast in phonation type is two-way (two
breathier lax tones vs. two creaky-voiced tones), (b) breathy and creaky phonation are
temporally dynamic in Burmese – produced systematically only at the vowel offset, and
(c) the phonation contrast is neutralized in juncture while pitch contrasts are maintained.
The results indicate that a purely Tone or Register analysis of Burmese is
inappropriate, in the sense that pitch contours or phonation type cannot alone serve as the
basis of contrast. Instead, the present state of affairs is argued to represent an intermediate
stage of tonogenesis, where multiple phonetic properties exist side-by-side to reinforce
suprasegmental categories. The analysis is cast in Optimality theoretic terms, which act to
highlight the phonological dilemma introduced by a seemingly redundant distribution of
properties. The study has implications for the typology of Tone and Register systems, as
it portrays a language in a transitional state between the two – some intrinsic pitch
distinctions have been phonologized, but a concomitant voice quality distinction remains
integral to the grammar.
iv
Acknowledgements
My name alone is credited with authorship of this dissertation. Yet countless others have
worked hard and contributed dearly to the efforts that have produced this work. It would
not have been possible without their knowledge, guidance, and support.
This dissertation would simply have not been possible without my Burmese
friends in the Washington, D.C. and Seattle, WA areas. They participated out of kindness
and an eagerness to share their language and culture. They accepted me into their homes,
fed me, and happily worked with me through long hours of not very stimulating data
collection. I owe a great thanks to each of them. In particular, I want to thank Merle and
Eddie Nakhuda for their role and the many times they hosted me in their home.
I am greatly indebted to the efforts of my committee members, Drs. Elizabeth
Zsiga, Marc Brunelle, and Robert Podesva. Lisa Zsiga has had a profound impact on both
this work and my development as a linguist. The dissertation exists because of Lisa’s
encouragement to pursue and expand the topic from an initial seminar project, and later,
to seek funding for the research tools. Beyond this work, Lisa has had a tremendous role
in my development as a linguist and cultivating my interest in phonetics, phonology, and
tone. From the day I walked into her office as a first year graduate student who thought
he wanted to study syntax, she has been nothing but supportive and committed to my
cause. I have benefited greatly from her knowledge and her teaching.
This dissertation was greatly improved by the counsel of Marc Brunelle and Rob
Podesva, and their individual expertise in voice quality research. Marc’s experience
investigating similar phenomena in Southeast Asian languages was invaluable. Every
discussion I had with Marc led to significant re-thinking or refinement of a claim. Rob
v
repeatedly drew my attention to details I had not considered, and valuably redirected me
from details I was getting lost in. I never felt more confident about the next step I was
taking than after meeting with Rob. I also owe thanks to Dan Loehr who, as the unofficial
fourth member of my dissertation committee, worked with me on my early attempts at
Burmese and continued to supervise and provide his thoughtful feedback at numerous
steps along the way. I am also grateful for the advice of Maria Gouskova. I still struggle
with writing, but I know that I am a better writer today because of Maria’s efforts.
I am thankful for the financial support provided by the National Science
Foundation, Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences. The research was funded by
the NSF Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant, BCS 0844031.
This research would have been excessively more difficult without the excellent
work and the willingness to discuss this work by Justin Watkins, Alexis Michaud, David
Bradley, Christian DiCanio, and Pat McCormick. Mietta Lennes, Christian DiCanio, and
Cedric Gendrot all generously shared Praat scripts which were critical to tackling my
data. I am similarly indebted to my friends Zhaleh Feizollahi, Michael Diercks, Justin
Kelly, Rebecca Sachs, Kjell Konis, and Melissa Martz for the many hours they have
spent helping me improve this work.
For making my time at Georgetown fruitful in fields of study beyond phonetics
and phonology, I want to thank Héctor Campos, Polyvia Parara, and Guiseppe Tosi.
For their friendship, and for proving to me that I could survive life on the East
Coast, I would like to particularly thank my brother Joe and his family. Kind thoughts are
similarly extended to Jen Sclafani and Steve Hamilton, Carlos Balhana, Chad McHenry,
Rachael Albritten, Jon Philips, Kris Concepcion, Dom Parr and many others.
vi
My parents and family deserve special recognition for enabling me to get to this
position: Fred and Anne, Young-Wha, Joe, and my comforting canine friend Rocco.
I want to express my deepest appreciation for my wife Shannon and the time and effort
she has expended on my behalf during the writing of this dissertation. Every setback or
trial that I endured, she also endured. With great love, Shannon, I thank you for both your
patience and impatience, as both were necessary to either persevere through the long
process or to occasionally light a fire. I also want to thank my son, Royal, for changing
my life. I haven’t met Royal yet, but he will be born in early 2012 and I am certain he
will be an amazing person.
This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Anne, who passed away in November
2008. Her life, her enthusiasm, and her curiosity continue to inspire me.
vii
Table of Contents

List of Figures xv
List of Tables xxi
Chapter One • Outline of the Problem and the Data 1
0. Introduction................................................................................................1
1.1 Goal of the Dissertation............................................................................1
1.2 Description of Burmese Phonology...........................................................3
1.2.1 Overview of the Language...............................................................3
1.2.2 Description of Burmese Phonology: Inventory of
Burmese Phonemes.......................................................................4
1.2.3 Description of Burmese Phonology: Inventory of
Burmese Tonemes.........................................................................5
1.2.3.1 Overview................................................................................5
1.2.3.2 The Low Tone [a]....................................................................6
1.2.3.3 High Tone [á]..........................................................................7
1.2.3.4 Creaky Tone [à̰]......................................................................9
1.2.3.5 Checked Tone [àɁ]................................................................10
1.2.3.6 Minor Syllables [ә]................................................................12
1.2.4 Description of Burmese Phonology: Syllable Codas.......................13
1.2.5 Description of Burmese Phonology: Vowel Quality.......................18
1.3 Typological Interest of the Dissertation ..................................................23
1.3.1 Burmese Dialects and the Language Background
1.3.1.1 of Study Participants...........................23
1.3.2 Tone or Register?...........................................................................26
1.3.3 Typology of Tone in Southeast Asia..............................................28
1.3.4 The Tonogenetic Roots of Typological Tone Patterns....................31
1.4 Outline of the Dissertation......................................................................37
viii
Chapter Two • Phonetic Properties of Burmese Tone......................39
2.1 Introduction............................................................................................39
2.2 Intensity.................................................................................................42
2.3 Tone Duration .......................................................................................43
2.4 Pitch ...................................................................................................48
2.5 Phonation Type......................................................................................54
2.5.1 The Role of Phonation Type..........................................................54
2.5.2 Creaky Tone, but “creaky” voice?..................................................56
2.5.3 Phonetic Studies: Impressionistic Descriptions...............................58
2.5.4 Phonetic Studies: Acoustic Measures.............................................60
2.5.5 Phonetic Studies: EGG and the Glottal Waveform.........................67
2.5.6 Phonetic Studies: Aerodynamic Analysis.......................................70
2.6 Summary of Phonetic Literature.............................................................72
2.7 Tonogenesis...........................................................................................74
2.8 Prior Phonological Accounts..................................................................76
2.8.1 Bradley (1982): “Register in Burmese”..........................................77
2.8.2 Yip (1995): Sketch of Tonal Properties in Burmese........................79
2.8.3 Lee (2007): “The effect of glottal stops on tone in Burmese” ........80
2.8.4 Green (2005): “Word, Foot, and Syllable Structure in Burmese”....81
2.8.4.1 Overview..............................................................................81
2.8.4.2 Meter....................................................................................82

Chapter Three • Experimental Methodology 84
3.1 Overview and Hypotheses......................................................................84
3.2 Methodology: Subjects...........................................................................86
3.3 Methodology: Stimuli.............................................................................88
3.4 Methodology: Equipment.......................................................................96
3.5 Methodology: Analysis, Phonetic Correlates of Phonological Tone........98
3.5.1 Overview.......................................................................................98
3.5.2 Segmentation Procedure.................................................................99
3.5.3 Duration.......................................................................................104
ix
3.5.4 Fundamental Frequency...............................................................105
3.5.5 Spectral Tilt.................................................................................107
3.5.6 Open Quotient: Analysis of the EG waveform..............................111
3.5.6.1 Calculating Open Quotient..................................................111
3.5.6.2 Common Errors in Automated DEGG Peak Detection.........114
3.5.6.3 Open Quotient Statistics and Predictions.............................117
3.5.7 Airflow Measures........................................................................118

Chapter Four • Results of Production Experiments 123
4.1 Introduction..........................................................................................123
4.2 Duration...............................................................................................127
4.2.1 Overview of DURATION Results...................................................127
4.2.2 DURATION of Isolated tokens – Carrier Phrase 1...........................130
4.2.3 DURATION of Phrase-Final tokens – Carrier Phrases 5, 6..............132
4.2.4 DURATION of Phrase-Medial tokens – Carrier Phrases 2, 3, 4.......134
4.2.5 DURATION of Phrase-Medial tokens before Minor Syllables –
Carrier Phrases 7, 8............................................137
4.2.5 Inter-Speaker Variation................................................................141
4.2.6 Summary of DURATION Data .......................................................143
4.3 Fundamental Frequency........................................................................145
4.3.1 F0 on Isolated Tokens – Carrier Phrase 1.....................................145
4.3.2 F0 on Phrase-Final Tokens – Carrier Phrase 5, 6..........................148
4.3.3 F0 on Phrase-Medial Tokens – Carrier Phrase 2, 3, 4...................150
4.3.4 F0 on Phrase-Medial Tokens before Minor Syllables –
Carrier Phrase 7, 8.............................................156
4.3.5 Statistical Analysis of F0.............................................................158
4.3.6 Summary of F0 Data....................................................................176
4.4 Spectral Profile: Comparative Amplitude of Harmonics........................180
4.4.1 Overview of Statistical Analysis of Spectral Tilt..........................180
4.4.2 H1-H2..........................................................................................185
4.4.3 H1-A1..........................................................................................190
x