Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:08:56.251Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Response to W. J. Barry & J. Trouvain, Do we need a symbol for a central open vowel? JIPA 38 (2008), 349–357

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Daniel Recasens*
Affiliation:
Department of Catalan Philology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona & Phonetics Laboratory, Institut d'Estudis Catalans, Barcelonadaniel.recasens@uab.es

Extract

In the paper ‘Do we need a symbol for a central open vowel?’, William Barry and Jürgen Trouvain unveil possible gaps in the IPA chart while positing the need for having three basic phonetic symbols for transcribing open vowels of the world's languages. The main point raised by the authors is that the phonetic quality of a in languages with a single open vowel is somewhere in between that of the open front and back vowels in more complex vowel systems. They exemplify this point by referring to the open vowel of the Spanish word gata, which is usually transcribed with the symbol [a] in spite of being more central than Cardinal Vowel 4. Several possible solutions are proposed: adding small capital A or barred a for the open central vowel to the already existing symbols [a] and [ɑ]; keeping [ɑ] for the open back vowel, moving the symbol [a] to the open central vowel position, and having either [æ] or small capital A as symbols for the open front vowel. As argued below, I do not believe that three IPA phonetic symbols are really needed for the transcription of different variants of a.

Type
The International Phonetic Alphabet
Copyright
Copyright © International Phonetic Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barry, William J. & Trouvain, Jürgen. 2008. Do we need a symbol for a central open vowel? Journal of the International Phonetic Association 38 (3), 349357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catford, J. C. 1988. A practical introduction to phonetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Delattre, Pierre. 1965. Comparing the phonetic features of English, French, German and Spanish: An interim report. Heidelberg: Julius Gross Verlag.Google Scholar
Delgado, Martins & Raquel, Maria. 1964–1973. Análise acústica das vogais orais tónicas em português. Boletim de Filologia 22, 303314.Google Scholar
Disner, Sandra Ferrari. 1983. Vowel quality: The relation between universal and language-specific factors (UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 58).Google Scholar
Ferrero, Franco E., Magno-Caldognetto, Emanuela, Vagges, Kiryaki & Lavagnoli, C.. 1978. Some acoustic characteristics of the Italian vowels. Journal of Italian Linguistics 3, 8796.Google Scholar
Fourakis, Marios, Botinis, Antonis & Katsaiti, Maria. 1999. Acoustic characteristics of Greek vowels. Phonetica 56, 2843.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IPA (International Phonetic Association). 1999. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Daniel. 1972. An outline of English phonetics, 9th edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1967. The nature of vowel quality. In Ladefoged, Peter, Three areas of experimental phonetics, 50142. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nobre, Maria Alzira & Ingemann, Frances. 1987. Oral vowel reduction in Brazilian Portuguese. In Channon, Robert & Shockey, Linda (eds.), In honor of Ilse Lehiste, 195206. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Peterson, Gordon E. & Barney, Harold L.. 1952. Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 24, 175184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quilis, Antonio. 1981. Fonética acústica de la lengua española. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Recasens, Daniel & Espinosa, Aina. 2006. Dispersion and variability of Catalan vowels. Speech Communication 48, 645666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Sidney. 1979. A radiographic analysis of constriction locations for vowels. Journal of Phonetics 7, 2543.Google Scholar
Wood, Sidney. 1982. Tense and lax vowels – Degree of constriction or pharyngeal volume? In Wood, Sidney, X-ray and model studies of vowel articulation (Working Papers, Lund University, Department of Linguistics 23), 157–134.Google Scholar