Linguopalatal and sagittal vocal tract configuration data from a large number of languages reveal that the so-called palatal consonants (i.e. [ç ʎ c ɲ j]), as well as the vowel [i], are often realized simultaneously at the alveolar and palatal zones. Moreover, while some of these sound categories may also exhibit a palatal constriction ([ç c ɲ j i]), others are exclusively alveolar or alveolopalatal in line with the manner of articulation characteristics involved ([ʎ], also [ɕ] and [tʃ]). Consonants may favor one or more places of articulation and differ in fronting degree depending on the language taken into consideration; moreover, there appears to be a symmetry requirement by which consonants differing in manner, such as [c] and [ɲ], may agree in place. The data reported in this paper argue in favor of a revision of the articulatory classification of palatal consonants by the International Phonetic Alphabet involving their subdivision into two classes, an alveolopalatal and a palatal one.

A great deal of recent research has focused on phonetic variation among American English vowels from different dialects. This body of research continues to grow as vowels continuously undergo diachronic formant changes that become characteristic of certain dialects. Two experiments using the Nationwide Speech Project corpus (Clopper & Pisoni 2006a) explored whether the Midland dialect is more closely related acoustically and perceptually to the Mid-Atlantic or to the Southern dialect. The goal of this study was to further our understanding of acoustic and perceptual differences between two of the most marked dialects (Mid-Atlantic and Southern) and one of the least marked dialects (Midland) of American English. Ten vowels in /hVd/ context produced by one male talker from each of these three dialects were acoustically analyzed and presented to Midland listeners for identification. The listeners showed the greatest vowel identification accuracy for the Mid-Atlantic talker (95.2%), followed by the Midland talker (92.5%), and finally the Southern talker (79.7%). Vowel error patterns were consistent with vowel acoustic differences between the talkers. The results suggest that, acoustically and perceptually, the Midland and Mid-Atlantic dialects are more similar than are the Midland and Southern dialects.

While there is variation among existing impressionistic accounts where the description of the RP English LOT and THOUGHT vowels is concerned (compare Wells 1982 (vol. I), Collins & Mees 2003, Roach 2004, Cruttenden 2008), not much attention has been paid to this issue in acoustic studies of RP (e.g. Wells 1962, Deterding 1990, Hawkins & Midgley 2005). In the present study, seven female native speakers of RP or near-RP born between 1985 and 1993 (i.e. speakers aged between 18 and 25 years at the time of the study) were recorded saying English words containing monophthongal vowels. In addition, data consisting of read speech from 18 male native speakers of RP or near-RP born between 1983 and 1991 (i.e. speakers aged between 18 and 25 years at the time they were recorded) contained in the DyViS database (Nolan et al. 2009) were analysed. The data were analysed acoustically by measuring F1 and F2 and normalising the measurements according to Lobanov's (1971) formula along with the mean F1 and F2 frequencies reported in Wells (1962), Deterding (1990) and Hawkins & Midgley (2005). Statistical analysis revealed statistically significant differences between the F1 formant measurements of the seven female speakers and the 18 male speakers versus Hawkins & Midgley's speakers born between 1946 and 1951; mean F1 was higher for the speakers born between 1946 and 1951. As for the THOUGHT vowel, the F1 measurements overlapped with the means relating to all different age groups in Hawkins & Midgley's (2005) data. It is suggested that RP LOT is undergoing raising whereas there is no strong evidence of any shift of the THOUGHT vowel.

Achieving voicing during fricatives is complex because voicing and frication require opposite production strategies that must be managed effectively at the supralaryngeal level. Previous research has suggested that there are differences in tongue-to-palate contact patterns that are conditioned by voicing. However, findings have been restricted to a single time point and have been generally inconclusive. This study used electropalatography (EPG) to investigate differences in the dynamics of contact in voiced and voiceless lingual fricatives. Participants were six typically speaking Croatian adults. The speech material consisted of symmetrical VCV sequences, where C was /s z ʃ ʒ/. EPG measures were taken throughout the fricatives and indices were used to quantify place of articulation (CoG), groove width and target configuration onset. The EPG measures showed similar results for voiced and voiceless fricatives during their central portions. However, there were notable differences at the periphery of the fricative period, the most significant being that the voiceless fricatives reached a stable period in terms of tongue placement and groove configuration later than the voiced fricatives. The results support aerodynamic evidence that voiced and voiceless fricatives differ in the onset and the offset of turbulence.

Luxembourgish (local language name: Lëtzebuergesch [ˈlətsəbuəjəʃ], French name: Luxembourgeois, German name: Luxemburgisch) is a small West-Germanic language mainly spoken in the multilingual speech community of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, where it is one of the three official languages alongside German and French. Being the first language of most Luxembourgers it also has the status of the national language (since 1984). Although in its origin Luxembourgish has to be considered as a Central Franconian dialect, it is nowadays regarded by the speech community as a language of its own. As a consequence, German is considered a different language. An official orthographical system has been devised. Luxembourgish is used very frequently in day-to-day oral communication at all social levels; it is very common on local radio and television; it is the only language spoken in parliament sessions and it is also very often used at the workplace. Although the vocabulary of Luxembourgish has a substantial number of loan words from French and German, the morpho-syntax follows Germanic patterns. Luxembourgish today has approximately 400,000 speakers, including many L2 speakers (around 43% of the population does not have the Luxembourgish nationality).

The Lizu (or Lüzu) language (/EPli-zu-hu/ or /EPly-zu-hu/) is spoken by approximately 7000 people who reside along the banks of the Yalong (雅 砻) or Nyag chu River in three counties in Sichuan Province (四 川 省) in the People's Republic of China: (i) Muli Tibetan Autonomous County 木 里 藏 族 自 治 县 (Written Tibetan, hereafter WT, smi li rang skyong rdzong), (ii) Jiulong county (九 龙 县 brgyad zur), (iii) Mianning county (冕 宁 县) (Wang 2010: 3).1 Lizu is currently considered as the western dialect of the Ersu 尔 苏 language (Sun 1982, 1983), which is in turn classified as a member of the Qiangic subgroup of the Tibeto-Burman language family (for more details, see Bradley 1997: 36–37; Sun 2001; Chirkova 2012).

Mapudungun (/mpʊðʊˈŋʊn/ or /mpʊθʊˈŋʊn/; also known as ‘Mapudungu’, ‘Mapuzugun’, ‘Mapuche’, ‘Mapuchedungun’, ‘Chedungun’ and ‘Araucanian’ or ‘Araucano’ (the latter two being archaic)) is a language isolate spoken actively by approximately 144,000 people in Chile (Zúñiga 2007), as well as by some 8,400 people in Argentina (Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos 2005), virtually all of whom are bilingual in Spanish. Its ISO 639–3 code is arn.

Shiwilu (a.k.a. Jebero) is a critically endangered language from Peruvian Amazonia and one of the two members of the Kawapanan linguistic family. Most of its nearly 30 remaining fluent speakers live in and around the village of Jeberos (District of Jeberos, Province of Alto Amazonas, Loreto Region), at approximately 5° S, 75° W.

The documentation of Shiwilu is scarce and no survey grammar is available. Until very recently, the only trained linguist who had worked on Shiwilu was John Bendor-Samuel, who carried out fieldwork in 1955–1956 and completed a doctoral thesis in 1958 (see Bendor-Samuel 1981 [1958]). An abridged version of the thesis, which includes an outline of the phonology, was published as Bendor-Samuel (1961). Whereas recent publications have focused on the social position of the Shiwilu language (Valenzuela 2010), morpho-syntactic aspects (Valenzuela 2011), and a formal demonstration of its family affiliation with the Shawi language (a.k.a. Chayahuita) (Valenzuela Bismarck 2011), the present article is the first account of its sound system since the work by Bendor-Samuel.

Tena Quichua (ISO 639-3: quw) belongs to the Quechuan language family, as part of the peripheral variety Quechua IIB (Torero 1964, Cerrón-Palomino 1987, Gordon 2005). It is spoken in the Eastern Amazonian region of Ecuador on the Napo River above the mouth of the Rio Coca, primarily on three tributaries: the Misahualli, the Arajuno, and the Ansuc. Tena Quichua is bounded on the North and East by Napo Quichua and on the South by Pastaza Quichua. Previous research on the division of Ecuadorian dialects is summarized by Carpenter (1984: 3–4). Although it is beyond the scope of this Illustration, we hope that our description of Tena Quichua will prove useful in future work on the relations between these three Amazonian dialects of Ecuadorian Quichua. Below, a brief summary of Tena dialect identification and formation is given, followed by a description of present-day bilingualism in the region and data collection procedures.

Bold indicates that audio files are available at http://web.uvic.ca/ling/resources/ipa/members/. Members may obtain log-on details from the Secretary.

The International Phonetic Association's by-laws recognize as Life Members those members who have paid membership dues for 30 years. The awarding of Life Membership is intended to honour the impressive records of service of long-time IPA members, and to acknowledge their contribution in a symbolic and in a practical way.

The following is a list of the countries of the current membership of the Association, based on the Association's records in November 2012. The numbers in parentheses indicate the total number of members per country (Life, Full, and Student combined). There are a total of 358 members (206 Life, 133 Full, and 19 Student) from 51 countries. Individual members’ names are no longer published.

At the Association's August 2011 General Meeting in Hong Kong, a suggestion was made that the IPA should establish a link with the Special Interest Group on Speech Prosody (SProSIG) of the International Speech Communication Association (ISCA). After discussion with SProSIG, the Council of the IPA has voted to become a co-sponsor of the group. SProSIG's Liaison Officer, Yi Xu of University College London, will serve as the Liaison Officer for the IPA with SProSIG and ISCA.

Jimmy Gene Harris died in Seattle on 30 September 2012, at the age of 82. He led a remarkable life. He was a soldier of fortune, a champion for human rights, an exacting phonetic fieldworker, an observer of human nature, a teller of stories, a teacher and a mentor. Raised in the Arkansas Ozarks, he began his international adventures as a US Marine Corps sergeant in the Korean War. He pursued his linguistic education in Mexico City and at the University of Washington, with an MA in 1966 specializing in Japanese and Asian Studies, while also carrying out fundamental language revitalization fieldwork with the Stó:lō Nation (Salish) in the Fraser River Valley of BC. In 1973, he obtained an MEd from the University of Southern California. On leave from his duties in the field from 1976 to 1978, he spent time refining his phonetic knowledge with David Abercrombie in Edinburgh and with Eugénie Henderson in London.