Editor for this issue: Sarah Murray <sarah
linguistlist.org>
Dear All, Thanks to Hartmut Traunm�ller for his PDF reference, and his response to my comments. For me, the revelation that clicks are used in whispered speech when hunting seals it: this is contamination from established linguistic usage, though it would be fascinating to know if hunters do have a different usage of clicks. I'm as much in the dark as anyone else as to why linguistic clicks are so common in southern Africa, and non-existent elsewhere (though this is a slight generalisation; bilabial clicks are not well-attested in linguistic usage even in southern Africa). Indeed, 'simple' clicks are not just common: they form the basis for many contrasts in that they are produced with a great many different 'click accompaniments', such as glottalisation, frication, nasalisation, voicing etc. in many languages which have them. It has been observed that clicks are relatively easy to produce and that the high amplitude of the signal generated is very salient perceptually (Ladefoged, 2001, Vowels and Consonants, Blackwell: 157). However, it is also clear that it is not quite so easy to distinguish between clicks at different places of articulation. This may be because the click itself is of relatively short duration. Clicks do not appear to be well embedded within the stream of speech, to the extent that acoustic cues to their identity are not spread over several surrounding articulations. The onset and offset to a click are always velar (occasionally uvular), but the brief duration of the click itself is not. This means that clicks are not integrated into the stream of speech acoustically like other speech sounds which will show some acoustic effects of other neighbouring sounds. They are not subject to parallel processing, i.e. the use of various cues to each sound spread across its neighbours, which may aid the rapid decoding of the speech signal. Perhaps this promotes their perception as 'non-speech' sounds, and works against them being very successful cross-linguistically. Perhaps... As for the palate theory, I am sceptical about this. The production of clicks (like other speech sounds, of course) requires a great many articulatory movements to be precisely co-ordinated, so presumably there are many phyisical parameters which could be judged as useful in click production. I'm unconvinced about the aerodynamic utility of having a gently sloping palate for click production, as the rarefying effects of a small lingual movement on the trapped pocket of air are quite massive regardless of your palate shape. In the production of ingressive clicks, the tongue tip may retract as the air is rarefied, which means the actual point of initial contact is less important. In my own production of clicks, the tongue seal is maintained mainly by the positive atmospheric pressure, so I think one would have to have a very prominent and irregularly shaped alveolar ridge (or an inflexible tongue) to inhibit click production. The origin and cross-linguistic rarity of clicks are fascinating subjects, but i feel we are still a long way from finding any answers. Mark Jones Department of Linguistics University of CambridgeMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue