Editor for this issue: <>
On Oct. 5th Alexis Manaster-Ramer submitted the following to the LINGUIST list: > There is the entire literature on incomplete > neutralization, which claims that in Russian, Polish, German, > and Catalan (which every phonetician has always heard as having > absolute total exceptionless final devoicing), there are small > but systematic measurable differences in the way underlying voiced > and voiceless finals are realized (differences realized in the > preceding vowel usually, as I understand). to which I responded with a message saying that the above statement > is incorrect: not EVERY phonetician has ALWAYS heard these > cases as having totally exceptionless final devoicing. Alexis reiterated his point of view in a message to me: > Some of the > world's finest phoneticians have certainly heard Polish, Russian, > and German. As far as I know, all of them have always reported > that there is no distinction of ANY kind in pairs like Polish > grat and grad. Many of them even claim that INSTRUMENTALLY > there is no difference, either. Alexis's claim is that the incomplete neutralization claim was not discovered by impressionistic listening, and that the durational and other differences which cue the distinction between word-final devoiced final obstruents and lexically voiceless obstruents is not audible by trained phoneticians or native speaker-hearers. I would like to add the following to the references which John Local recently posted in refutation of Alexis's claim: Malmberg, B. (1963) Phonetics. Dover Publications, New York. p. 52n. "in the latter languages, the voiced types are always fully voiced, while in English, German, etc., they are often only half-voiced or even voiceless without becoming fortes. So a solid distinction between the series is retained." Port, R. F. and M. L. O'Dell (1985) Neutralization of syllable-final voicing in German. J. Phonetics 13, 455-471. p. 455: "German is well known for its neutralization of the voicing contrast in word-final obstruents. However, acoustic analysis of ten pairs of German words produced by ten native speakers revealed that the distributions of acoustic parameters for underlying voiced and voiceless stops are significantly different." Chen, M. (1970) Vowel Length Variation as a Function of the Voicing of the Consonant Environment. Phonetica 22: 129-159. p. 135n. "in Russian voiced obstruents are devoiced in word-final positions, ... it is interesting to note that the primary feature of voicing of the final stops in the underlying represent notions of /gleb/, etc. remains under the guise of the secondary feature of lengthening of the preceding vowel, even though voicing itself is absent phonetically." Dinnsen, D. A. and J. Charles-Luce (1984) Phonological neutralization, phonetic implementation and individual differences. J. Phonetics 12, 49-60. p. 49 "It was found, contrary to all phonological accounts, that individual speakers vary in their treatment of word-final devoicing such that there is no neutralization for, at least, some speakers." Alexis further says: > However, I do not see any references to studies > that show that phoneticians (or ANY human beings) can hear the > distinctions which have been claimed to show up in instrumental > studies of, for example, Polish, Russian, German, and Catalan > final underlyingly voiced vs. underlyingly voiceless obstruents. Port and O'Dell (1985:455) state: "Furthermore, in a listening test, German listeners were able to distinguish the voiced and voiceless pairs with about 60% accuracy --- significantly better than chance." Alexis Manaster-Ramer writes: > Thus, I stand by my statement that there is no evidence that > anybody has ever heard such contrasts in German Ear-trained phoneticians, in fact most linguists, will know that phonetic theory is taught and perpetuated mostly through oral tradition, rather than published citations. Like it or not, therefore, however good or bad I and my colleagues are at digging up the old references to support the claim about incomplete neutralization cannot settle the argument. I was taught in class that for some speakers and dialects at least Final Obstruent Devoicing in German is NOT absolute neutralization, and we listened to some native speakers of German. This was in 1981, i.e. 4 years before Port and O'Dell's J. Phonetics article. I took it to be one of those pieces of "common knowledge" that all or perhaps I should say most ear-trained phoneticians in the Ellis/Bell/Sweet/Jones tradition learned. So I know that SOME ear-trained phoneticians at least claimed that German FOD was not incomplete neutralization, before Mitleb, Port, Dinnsen, Charles-Luce, and Kohler's studies were published. Perhaps it came from David Abercrombie. I'm not sure and I admit it has proved very difficult to track down the claim in writing. By the way, I would like to throw the writer/rider stuff into the pot, since I have references to show the acuteness of ear-trained phoneticians in spotting THIS instance of incomplete neutralization. P.S. On the incomplete neutralization of intervocalic /t/ and /d/ in American English, see also Donia Scott's abstract in JASA Suppl. 1, Vol. 75, (1984), p. S66. The experiment she reports verified the skills of ear-trained phoneticians to resolve cues to the voicing distinction even when the so-called identical /t/ and /d/ were cross-spliced. --- John ColemanMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue