Dept.

for Speech, Music and Hearing

Quarterly Progress and
Status Report

Distinctive features and

phonetic dimensions
Fant, G.

journal: STL-QPSR
volume: 10
number: 2-3
year: 1969
pages: 001-018

http://www.speech.kth.se/qpsr
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969

I. SPEECH ANALYSIS

A. DISTINCTIVE FEATURES AND PHONETIC DIMENSIONS*

G. F a n t

The purpose of t h i s p a p e r is t o e x p r e s s s o m e c o m m e n t s on the r e c e n t

developments of distinctive f e a t u r e theory with specific r e f e r e n c e t o t h e
work of Chomsky and Halle (1968). On the whole I c o n s i d e r t h e i r f e a t u r e
s y s t e m t o b e a n improvement o v e r that of Jakobson, F a n t , and Halle (1952),
one of the m a i n advantages being the introduction of a s e t of tongue body
f e a t u r e s i n common f o r vowels and consonants but s e p a r a t e f r o m the con-
I
sonantal "place of articulation" f e a t u r e s . The b a s i c philosophy of treating
phonetics a s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of g e n e r a l linguistics demands that f e a t u r e s
i n addition to t h e i r c l a s s i f i c a t o r y function s h a l l have a definite phonetic
function reflecting independently controllable a s p e c t s of the s p e e c h event
o r independent elements of perceptual representation. However, t h e r e is
a d a n g e r that the i m p a c t of the t h e o r e t i c a l f r a m e with its a p p a r e n t m e r i t s
of operational efficiency will give s o m e r e a d e r s the i m p r e s s i o n that the s e t
of f e a t u r e s i s once f o r a l l established and that t h e i r phonetic b a s i s h a s been
thoroughly investigated. This i s not so. Many of t h e i r propositions a r e in-
t e r e s t i n g and stimulating s t a r t i n g points f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h w h e r e a s
o t h e r s I find i n need of a revision.

As pointed out by Chomsky and Halle t h e r e a r e s t i l l s e r i o u s s h o r t -

comings i n o u r g e n e r a l knowledge of the speech event. Their feature sys-
t e m i s a l m o s t entirely based on s p e e c h production categorizations. The
exclusion of a c o u s t i c a l and perceptual c o r r e l a t e s was a p r a c t i c a l limitation
i n the scope of t h e i r w o r k but a l s o a p p e a r s t o note the i m p o r t a n c e layed on
the production stage. It is f a r e a s i e r t o c o n s t r u c t hypothetical f e a t u r e
s y s t e m s than t o t e s t t h e m on any level of the s p e e c h communication chain.
This i s r e a l l y o u r p r e s e n t dilemma. Until we have reached a m o r e solid
b a s i s i n g e n e r a l phonetics any f e a t u r e t h e o r y will r e m a i n "preliminary".

H e r e follows m y reaction t o s o m e of t h e b a s i c i s s u e s i n c h a p t e r seven

of Sound P a t t e r n of English. My e a r l i e r comments on distinctive f e a t u r e
t h e o r y may b e found i n the l i s t of r e f e r e n c e s , F a n t (1960a, b , 1966, 1967,
1968).
9
submitted f o r publication i n the proceedings of the Second International
C o n g r e s s of Applied Linguistics, Cambridge, England, Sept. 8- 12, 1969.
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969

1. Will we e v e r have a language u n i v e r s a l , finite, and

unique s e t of distinctive f e a t u r e s ?

The universality a s p e c t s a r e a t t r a c t i v e but I a m somewhat p e s s i m i s t i c

about the outlooks. F e a t u r e s a r e a s u n i v e r s a l a s the sound producing con-
s t r a i n t s of t h e human s p e e c h producing m e c h a n i s m and a finite n u m b e r
should suffice f o r the c l a s s i f i c a t o r y function. However, I a m r a t h e r s c e p -
t i c a l concerning t h e uniqueness and t h e r e b y a definite number of f e a t u r e s
s i n c e one and the s a m e facts often c a n b e d e s c r i b e d i n a l t e r n a t i v e f o r m s
and the c r i t e r i a f o r selecting a n optimum s y s t e m a r e not v e r y rigid. Even
if we had a l l the knowledge we needed the choice of f e a t u r e s would b e de-
pendent on the p a r t i c u l a r weight given t o phonetic and g e n e r a l linguistic
considerations and the p r e f e r e n c e s of the investigator would i n the last in-
s t a n c e d e t e r m i n e s o m e of t h e selections. The p r o b l e m is t h e following.

2. A r e the demands on a f e a t u r e s y s t e m different on t h e

c l a s s i f i c a t o r y l e v e l and the phonetic l e v e l ?

T h e r e a r e two ways of a r r i v i n g a t features: (1) by selecting a n inven-

t o r y of c l a s s e s suitable f o r encoding of language s t r u c t u r e s and then d e t e r -
mine t h e i r phonetic c o r r e l a t e s o r (z), t o s t a r t with a n exhaustive analysis
of the modes and c o n s t r a i n t s of the s p e e c h producing m e c h a n i s m s and p e r -
ception and d e t e r m i n e t h e i r distinctive function i n language. Feature
t h e o r y h a s t o develop along both lines and i n v e s t i g a t o r s d i f f e r only i n the
relative i m p o r t a n c e layed on one o r the other. T h e m a i n approach of
Jakobson e t a1 (1 952) was t o s t a r t out with a n ordering of phonemic oppo-
sitions and t o identify m i n i m a l distinctions a s the s a m e if motivated by
phonetic s i m i l a r i t i e s . The demand f o r a s m a l l e s t possible number of
f e a t u r e s and the fargoing identification of f e a t u r e s within t h e vowel and
consonant s y s t e m s , e.g. that of identifying the relation between dentals
and labials with that of front and back vowels, r e s u l t e d i n a n unavoidable
pay-off between encoding efficiency and phonetic r e a l i t y and specifiability.
Chomsky and Halle (1968) avoided s o m e of t h e s e difficulties by introducing
a g r e a t e r n u m b e r of f e a t u r e s .

One of t h e i r b a s i c i s s u e s i s that a f e a t u r e s y s t e m i n addition t o t h e

c l a s s i f i c a t o r y efficiency should conform with a n a t u r a l phonetic s y s t e m a t i -
zation. How have they managed i n t h i s r e s p e c t ? In many i n s t a n c e s s u c h
a s dealing with the c l a s s e s of f r i c a t i v e s , stops, n a s a l s , l a t e r a l s , etc. ,
t h e solution is s t r a i g h t forward. On the o t h e r hand, I find the encoding of
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 3. - .

the c l a s s of labial consonants a s [+ a n t e r i o r ) and [ - coronal] t o constitute

a c l e a r c a s e of d e p a r t u r e f r o m the unifying principles. One single phonetic
dimension, "labiality", which has a distinctive function has h e r e l o s t i t s
identity on the phonological level. It appears to be a r a t h e r far-fetched
hypothesis that the actual neural encoding of labial consonants a t s o m e
stage should include a selection of a maximal a n t e r i o r point of articula-
tion i n the vocal t r a c t and a l a c k of tongue t i p evaluation i n o r d e r f o r a
lower level t o find out that this command has to be executed by the lips
and not the tongue.

The m a j o r c l a s s f e a t u r e s "vocalic" and "consonantal" introduced al-

ready in the work of Jakobson e t a1 and the features "sonorant" and syl-
labic display a complicated s y s t e m of interdependencies a s will be de-
scribed in l a t e r sections.

The starting point f o r the m a j o r c l a s s features a p p e a r s to have been

the need t o encode c e r t a i n pre-established phonetic c l a s s e s whereas the
voiced-voiceless feature i s a typical example of the opposite approach,
i. e. t o s t a r t out with a natural phonetic dimension and study i t s distinctive
role i n language. A natural linguistic c l a s s , i. e. a l l [ r ] -phonemes, may
have r a t h e r complicated s e t s of phonetic c o r r e l a t e s and a natural phonetic
dimension a s voicing may have t o be studied together with s e v e r a l other
dimensions a s tensening, durations, and coarticulation when i t comes t o
the discussion of i t s distinctive role,

Before we can accomplish the happy m a r r i a g e between phonology and

phonetics we have to work out the rules f o r predicting the speech event
given the output of the phonological component of g r a m m a r . To m e this
i s the central, though much neglected, problem of phonetics and i t i s of
the s a m e magnitude a s that of generative g r a m m a r in g e n e r a l and will r e -
quire a s i m i l a r s e t of transformational rules, The starting point i s the
feature m a t r i x of a m e s s a g e a s successive phonological segments, i. e,
columns each with i t s specific bundle of features, i. e. rows, The parti-
c u l a r choice of classificatory features a t this stage i s not v e r y important
providing the conventions relating phonemes to alternative features s y s -
t e m s a r e known.

The derivation of the rules of this "phonetic component" of language

a i m s a t describing the speech production, speech wave, o r perception c o r -
r e l a t e s of each feature given the "context" i n a very g e n e r a l s e n s e of
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 4.

co-roccurking features within the phohological segment a s well a s those of

following and preceding segments. One s e t of sequential constraints a r e
expreeraible a s coakticulatibn rules which may be both universal and lan-
guage ispecificr

In additidn t o these m o r e o r l e s s i n e r t i a dependent laws of connecting

vocal g e s t u r e s t h e r e may exist rules of n e u r a l reorganization of control
signals f o r modifying the physi c a l manifestation of a feature i n accordance
with a principle of l e a s t effort articulation, o r the contrary, a compensa-
tion f o r maintaining o r sharpening of a phonetic distinction dependent on
what features occur o r follow in the t i m e domain. In addition t h e r e e n t e r I
rules f o r modifications dependent on s t r e s s patterns, intonation, tempo,
s p e a k e r , sex, type, and dialect, attitude etc. Rules f o r speech segment
durations and sound shapes have t o be expressed in t e r m s of l a r g e r phono-
logical segments, generally s e v e r a l syllables defining a n a t u r a l rhyth-
m i c a l unit i n t e r m s of s t r e s s and intonation. Very little is known about
t h e s e rules. T h e r e is s o m e evidence that the phase of maximal intensity
i n c r e a s e within a syllable is a r e f e r e n c e point f o r ordering rules concern-
ing segment durations (B . Lindblom, personal communication).

This "phonetic component!' of the speech event receives v e r y little

attention in the work of Chomsky and Halle who m e r e l y r e f e r t o the phone-
tic c o r r e l a t e s of a feature a s a s c a l e with many s t e p s instead of the binary
scaling on the classificatory level. A knowledge of linguistic structuring
is of g r e a t importance i n practical communication engineering undertakings
such a s the administration of synthesis by rule o r automatic identifications.
However, without a c c e s s t o the rules of the "phonetic component" the
phonetic a s p e c t of features becomes a s imaginary and empty a s the "Em-
p e r o r ' s New Clothes" in the s t o r y of H. C. Andersen. Observing the
speech wave we a r e not faced with phonemes o r f e a t u r e s but sound seg-
ments and m o r e o r l e s s continuous sound shapes with a reciprocal many-
to-one relation between phonol.ogica1 and physical units. The s a m e is t r u e
of speech production studied in relation to the phonological transcript. In
both c a s e s t h e r e is the need t o define inventories of physical units, F a n t
(1968), which a r e not identical t o the distinctive f e a t u r e s but a r e used t o
define t h e i r phonetic c o r r e l a t e s . It may be quite p r a c t i c a l t o r e f e r to a
specific sequence of segments a s a stop followed by a fricative a t the phon-
etic level while we may want t o r e f e r t o the whole unit a s a n affricate on
the phonological level.
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 5.

T h o s e who want t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r ? e r s ~ e c t i v e son phonology i n relation

t o phonetics should r e a d Ladefoged' s monograph "Linguistic phonetics l1
(1 967a). A p u r e phonetic s y s t e m was outlined by G. E, P e t e r s o n (1 968).

3. What is the psychological r e a l i t y of f e a t u r e s ?

As d e m o n s t r a t e d i n the previous section f e a t u r e s m u s t , a t l e a s t u n d e r

prototype conditions, have physical c o r r e l a t e s a s observed by a n e x t e r n a l
o b s e r v e r of the s p e e c h communication a c t and they should hopefully r e -
flect c a t e g o r i c a l phenomena i n the encoding and decoding mechanism.
This is not t h e s a m e a s a s c r i b i n g each f e a t u r e to a specific b r a i n alloca-
tion. We c a n b e a w a r e of a f e a t u r e by introspection but otherwise it may
l a c k i m m e d i a t e neurophysiological c o r r e l a t e s . The important thing is that
the actual p r o c e s s e s a r e phenomena that have s o m e a b s t r a c t relation t o o u r
feature matrices,

4. I s the b i n a r v ~ r i n c i ~ilme ~ o r t a n t ?

No, not n e c e s s a r i l y , but i t is convenient. Language r e g u l a r i t i e s and

language developments m a y i n s o m e i n s t a n c e s b e m o r e easily d e s c r i b e d
by s c a l e s of t h r e e o r m o r e l e v e l s , cif. Ladefoged (1967a). It i s a l s o
questionable whether formulations i n t e r m s of f e a t u r e m a t r i c e s always
r e v e a l s m o r e fundamental r u l e s than formulations i n t e r m s of phonemes.

5. A r e f e a t u r e s independent and orthogonal?

T h i s question c a n p e r t a i n both t o the c l a s s i f i c a t o r y , "phonological

level", and t o the phonetic l e v e l discussing the production s p e e c h wave
and perceptual c o r r e l a t e s . B e s i d e s the a p p a r e n t c o n s t r a i n t s on possible
sequences of phonological s e g m e n t s t h e r e e x i s t u n i v e r s a l c o n s t r a i n t s on
f e a t u r e combinations within one and the s a m e segment. As d i s c u s s e d by
Chomsky and Halle [t high] would contradict [t low]. Also, s o m e f e a t u r e s
o r combinations of f e a t u r e s imply specific signs of o t h e r f e a t u r e i n the
s a m e bundle, a s exemplified by [t vocalic] implying [t sonorant]. A
c l o s e r analysis of interdependencies within the m a j o r c l a s s f e a t u r e s r e -
v e a l s that the c l a s s of [+ sorlorants] by definition a l s o i n c o r p o r a t e s all
[t s y l l a b i c s ] and a l l C- consonantal] segments. Such c o n s t r a i n t s will b e
d i s c u s s e d i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l i n the section of m a j o r c l a s s f e a t u r e s . The
phonological dependencies within this s e t of f e a t u r e s a r e paralleled by
phonetic s i m i l a r i t i e s . Thus the c l a s s of C- cons onantala incorporating
vowels and glides m u s t have much i n common with the c l a s s of [t vocalic]
incorporating vowels and liquids. In o t h e r words "vocalic" i s a l m o s t the
negative of the "consonantal" feature.

The phonetic interdependencies a r e apparent even when they a r e not

paralleled by c l a s s i f i c a t o r y constraints. The situation had been i d e a l i n
the vowel s y s t e m if the perceptually relevant number of dimensions had
I
been the s a m e a s the number of c l a s s i f i c a t o r y f e a t u r e s . We would have
had a perfect orthogonal s y s t e m if limited t o the [ t low] o r [ - high] and '

the [ - back] dimensions corresponding t o the +F1 and +F2 dimensions,

respectively. The f e a t u r e "rounding" i s c o r r e l a t e d with - ( F ~ + F ~ +and
P~)
thus only partially independent of o t h e r features. The s a m e i s t r u e of the
f e a t u r e "tense" which is related to the f o r m a n t p a t t e r n (direction towards
a n e x t r e m e t a r g e t ) and duration. Additional f e a t u r e s and/or s c a l e values
a r e needed f o r the Swedish vowel s y s t e m as will b e d i s c u s s e d l a t e r .

We accordingly have t o r e s o r t to the m i n i m a l c l a i m of Chomsky and

Halle that f e a t u r e s should b e a t l e a s t partially independent. At the s a m e
t i m e we have t o b e a w a r e of considerable interdependencies. This applies
t o t h e i r c l a s s i f i c a t o r y function a s well a s t o t h e i r phonetic c o r r e l a t e s .

6. A r e differences i n f e a t u r e contents of m a t r i c e s a
reliable m e a s u r e of phonetic d i s t a n c e ?

No, not always. On a n a v e r a g e b a s i s i t might b e p e r m i s s i b l e t o ex-

p r e s s differences between languages o r d i a l e c t s by summing b i n a r y units
i n t h e c l a s s i f i c a t o r y domain and expect s u c h differences t o r e p r e s e n t t h e i r
phonetic differences, Ladefoged (1969). However, one cannot expect the
phonetic difference between any two phonemes t o b e proportional to the
number of f e a t u r e s by which they differ. T h e situation was especially
s e v e r e i n the Jakobson, F a n t , and Halle s y s t e m , It was s t a t e d that t h e
[Q] and the [i] of the word "wing" do not have any f e a t u r e s i n common,
the [ i ] being [$. -
voc] [ cons)[ - compact][ - g r a v e ] , t h e [ Q ] being [ - voc]
[ t cons] [ + nasal] [tcompact]. On the phonetic level, on t h e o t h e r hand,
the difference between t h e [i] and the [ n l is m i n i m a l s i n c e t h e e n t i r e [i]
is nasalized and the t r a n s i t i o n f r o m [i] t o [ n ] m e r e l y involves a g e s t u r e
of tongue c l o s u r e which i n d i a l e c t a l v a r i a n t s is omitted. Within the
C homs ky-Halle f r a m e w o r k the situation i s indeed improved s i n c e t h e tongue
body f e a t u r e s [ -back][-low][+high] a r e i n common f o r the two segments.
 Consonantal sound{ a r e produced with a r a d i c a l c o n s t r i c t i o n i n the
midsagittal region of t h e vocal t r a c t , This c o n s t r i c t i o n l i m i t s the flow of
a i r i n the obstruents and i n the closed phase of r-sounds w h e r e a s i t is
"shunted", i. e. by-passed i n l a t e r a l s and nasals. B e c a u s e of the v a r i e t y
of sounds t o b e included by the f e a t u r e a formulation of the acoustical c o r -
r e l a t e s becomes r a t h e r complex, the common denominator being a devia-
tion f r o m the i d e a l "vocalic" p a t t e r n by a reduction of the second and/or
higher formants.

Vocalic sounds a r e produced with a n o r a l opening that s h a l l not exceed

that of the high vowels [i] and [ u ] and which by definition shall b e g r e a t e r
than that of glides. In addition the vocal c o r d s s h a l l be positioned to allow
f o r spontaneous voicing. This requirement rules out unvoiced vowels a s
being nonvocalic. O r a l opening h e r e includes l a t e r a l opening and i n c a s e
of sonorant [ r] -sounds the m o r e open intervals. The acoustic c o r r e l a t e
i s a higher F1 and higher o v e r a l l intensity than i n nonvocalic sounds.

Syllabic sounds f o r m a syllabic peak i n the sequence of sound events.

Obstruents a r e by definition exchided f r o m the possibility of forming s y l -
labic peaks, w h e r e a s syllabic n a s a l s and liquids between o b s t r u e n t s a r e
basically c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the s a m e c r i t e r i o n a s that of vowels between
obstruents o r glides. A weighted s u m of second and f i r s t formant inten-
sity relative to that of adjacent phonetic segment would b e the s i m p l e s t
acoustic c o r r e l a t e .

Sonorant sounds. The relative d e g r e e of sonority c a n b e based on

exactly the s a m e c r i t e r i a a s f o r syllabicity except that the relative d e g r e e
of sonority i s related to a l t e r n a t i v e compositions of one and the s a m e s e g -
ment w h e r e a s syllabicity implies c o m p a r i s o n s i n the t i m e domain. The
production c c r r e l a t e of sonority i s the s u m of vocal t r a c t openings includ-
ing o r a l , nasal, and l a t e r a l p a s s a g e s which i s l a r g e r than that found i n ob-
struents. Thus [ - s o n o r a n t ] = obatruent. An interesting c l a i m not yet
verified i s that nonsonorarit sounds would not allow "spontaneous voicing"
and that a compensation of glottal adjustment to counteract the i m p a i r e d
flow would b e n e c e s s a r y .

T h e interdependencies between b a s i c c l a s s f e a t u r e s a r e a s a p p a r e n t
on the phonetic level a s on the c l a s s i f i c a t o r y level. The situation i s even
m o r e complicated by the fact that the continuant -noncontinuant (stop)
f e a t u r e i s the s a m e a s the consonantal f e a t u r e , except that the d e g r e e of
 STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 9.

p r i m a r y s t r i c t u r e is total i n stops and i n the closed i n t e r v a l of a f f r i c a t e s

but not total i n the [+consonantal][+continuant] fricatives.

I fully a g r e e with Chomsky and Kalle on the need f o r replacing the

"vocalic" f e a t u r e by the "syllabic" feature. The syllabicity s e e m s t o b e
m o r e easily t e s t a b l e than the vocalicity which employs a disputable t h r e s -
hold between liquids and glides which does not focus on the important dif-
ferences. F u r t h e r m o r e , I suggest a f u r t h e r reduction of the number of
f e a t u r e s dealing with vocal t r a c t opening by replacing the f e a t u r e s "con-
sonantal" and "continuant" by one single f e a t u r e (medially) "closed" which
i s identical t o the "consonantal" f e a t u r e but f o r a n extension t o s e p a r a t e
s t o p s and a f f r i c a t e s f r o m f r i c a t i v e s , Before applying t h i s f e a t u r e we s h a l l
study hov.1 s o m e of the m a i n phonetic c l a s s e s a r e encoded.

TABLE I-A-1
affri- frica-
vowels n a s a l s l a t e r a l s r-sounds glides+h stops c a t e s tives
syllabic + -. + - t - t - (-) (-) (-1
consonantal - (+)+ (+I + (+) + - (4 (+I (+)
s ono rant (+) +(+) + (+> + (+I (+I - - -
na s a1 + +
lateral ( - ) (-)
continuant
inst. r e l e a s e

F e a t u r e s that by definition a r e implied by o t h e r f e a t u r e s of the s a m e

phonological segment a r e m a r k e d with parantheses. Blank s p a c e s r e p r e -
s e n t o t h e r instances of "unmarkedness", i. e, ( a ) not applicable b e c a u s e
of physiological c o n s t r a i n t s , (b) i r r e l e v a n t f o r the c l a s s i f i c a t o r y function,
o r ( c ) o c c u r r e n c e i n r a r e c a s e s only. In detailed feature-analysis it
would b e valuable t o have s e p a r a t e notations f o r t h e s e f o u r different a s -
pects of u n m a r k e d n e s s and a l s o f o r the fifth a s p e c t , that related to sequen-
t i a l c o n s t r a i n t s a s implied by a l l higher l e v e l s of analysis. According t o
Chomsky and Halle the [ + n a s a l ] f e a t u r e when added t o s t o p s could stand
f o r prenasalization, i. e. instance ( c ) above, w h e r e a s +nasal, when added
to vowels o r liquids, is a contextual v a r i a n t due t o adjacent n a s a l conso-
nants and c a n thus b e omitted f r o m the m a t r i x ( c a s e (b) above). 1
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969

It i s interesting t o note that if the f e a t u r e m a t r i x is t o b e used f o r d e -

s c r i p t i o n of actual phonetic s t a t e s , i t would not be possible to distinguish
between p r o p e r n a s a l consonants and nasalized [ r ) -sounds. This is a
consequence of liquids being opposed t o n a s a l consonants i n t e r m s of
[ - n a s a l 1 f e a t u r e alone instead of by a specific complex a s the [+vocalic]
[+consonantal] i n the e a r l i e r conventions.

A s i m i l a r c a s e of defining a phonetic category by t h e negative of a n

o t h e r not d i r e c t l y related category i s the encoding of [ r ] - s o u n d s a s
[ -lateral]. It is questionable whether a n inhibition of the l a t e r a l command
i n the production of a n [I] automatically r e s u l t s i n a n [ rl-sound. Addi-
tional adjustment m a y b e n e c e s s a r y . T h e s e examples a r e analogous t o
the [ -coronal, + a n t e r i o r ] encoding of l a b i a l consonants which I c o n s i d e r
m o r e objectional, All t h e s e instances of classification i n t e r m s of com-
binations and selections f r o m a finite s e t a r e acceptable provided we give
up the demand that e a c h f e a t u r e s h a l l r e p r e s e n t a n independent and s p e c i -
fic production category.

A coding t r e e related t o Table I-A-1 i s shown i n Fig. I-A-1, T h e syl-

labic f e a t u r e p r e s i d e s i n the top but this is not crucial. The s a m e number
of yes-no branching points would have been needed if we put the sonority
f e a t u r e on top. Now, coding t r e e s a r e deceptive i n a way s i n c e a l l s o r t s
of variations and h i e r a r c h i e s a r e possible b e c a u s e of inherent redundan-
cies, However, the manipulation of coding t r e e s h a s the pedagogical
m e r i t of bringing out t h e s e redundancies.

E x a m p l e s of coding t r e e s f o r the reduced s e t of f e a t u r e s I have p r o -

posed a r e shown i n Figs. I-A-2 and I-A-3. In one the syllabic f e a t u r e is
placed on the top, i n the o t h e r i t i s given t h e lowest place and sonorant
the top place. The economy in t e r m s of branching points i s the s a m e i n
a l l the t h r e e figures. Figs. I-A-2 and I-A-3 m e r e l y have t h e m e r i t of a
s m a l l e r number of features. It was actually during the construction of
s u c h t r e e s that I observed the complementary distribution of [-continuant]
and [+consonantal]. I p r e f e r the t r e e of Fig. I-A-2 which s t a r t s out with
the sonorant f e a t u r e related t o vocal t r a c t opening i r r e s p e c t i v e of w h e r e
i t occurs. Then, logically follows the f e a t u r e of c l o s u r e i n the vocal
t r a c t midsagittal plane, then the m a n n e r of r e l e a s e of this c l o s u r e which
applies t o [ -sonorants2 only. The medially closed s o n o r a n t s a r e then
s e p a r a t e d into n a s a l s , l a t e r a l s , and r-sounds a s previously d i s c u s s e d
SYLLABIC +- -
CONSONANTAL
SONOR ANT
NASAL -- --- - . .- --

LATERAL
CONTINUANT -
-*4

INST. RELEASE
b 0 0 0 0
vow L r nos nos 1 r stop affr fric glides + h
0 0 0

SYLLABIC

Fig. I-A-l . Coding tree with the basic Chom~ky-Hallefeatures, "syllabic" replacing "vocalic".
SONOR ANT +--
-
r
-I+ +I- -
1
MID-CLOSU E
(consonantal 7 - -7

INST. RELEASE -
NASAL -
LATERAL
SYLLABIC -
+a-
b b b b C,
vow glidesnosnos 1 1 r r stop affr fric
+h 0 , o 0

Fig. I - A - 2 . Coding tree with the features contonantal and continuant replaced by a single
feature l'mid-closure'l, T h e feature "sonorant" is given the top level.
SYLLABIC + -* -
I

INST. RELEASE

vow nas t r glid,ees nas 1 r stop affr f ric

SYLLABIC

Fig. I - A - 3 . Alternative coding t r e e with the s a m e features a s in Fig. I-A-2 arranged in a

different order, the feature "syllabic" in the top. Note the relation to Fig. I - A - 1 .
 STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 11.

and glides a r e opposed to v,>wels a s nonsyllabic. The main acoustic c o r -

r e l a t e of voiced sonorants i s t h e i r higher Fl intensity, w h e r e a s the acous-
t i c c o r r e l a t e s of "closure" is a reduction of f o r m a n t s higher than F1. The
specification of t h e n a s a l and the l a t e r a l c o r r e l a t e s a r e not s o simple.
They will not b e d i s c u s s e d here.

Some detailed comments

The c l a s s of h-sounds h a s always been a p r o b l e m in f e a t u r e analysis.

I a c c e p t the classification of glides (semivowels) and h-sounds given by
Chomsky and Halle a s [t sonorant], [ -consonantal]<* and [ -syllabic but I
object t o t h e i r contrasting of h-sounds t o o t h e r glides a s [+low]. This
solution i s a n apparent mistake since h-sounds display perfect c o a r t i c u l a -
tion with vowels whether [+low] o r [ -low]. The h-sounds, voiced o r un-
voiced, a r e produced with a n active glottal readjustment.

The p r e s e n c e of the unvoiced h-sound i n the c l a s s of sonorants weakens

the s i m p l e acoustic c o r r e l a t e of intensity if this c l a s s s i n c e v e l a r f r i c a -
tives display s i m i l a r acoustic p a t t e r n s but with m o r e noise i n the region
above F2. The d e g r e e to which the intensity i s a s s o c i a t e d with the vocalic
formant p a t t e r n s i s accordingly a n e c e s s a r y a s p e c t t o take into account.
This fact a l s o c o r r e l a t e s with the affinity of sonorants to b e found next to
the syllabic nucleus.

Directly related to the classification of h-sounds i s the t r e a t m e n t of

aspiration. The s t a t e m e n t of Ghomsky and Halle that a f e a t u r e of height-
ened subglottal p r e s s u r e s is a n e c e s s a r y r e q u i r e m e n t f o r zspiratior, is not
tenable, s e e F a n t , Acoustic Theory of Speech P r o d u c t i o n , pp. 277 -27 9.
Instead we need a new f e a t u r e of "glottal relaxation" yet to b e defined that
c o v e r s a s p i r a t i o n i n g e n e r a l a s well a s the c l a s s of h-sounds.

On the whole, t h e r e is a need f o r f u r t h e r studies of the phonatory

m e c h a n i s m i n various situations before we c a n single out the various phon-
etic components involved i n the various m a n n e r of articulations of stop
sounds. The difference between English o r Swedish [P, t , k] and [ b , d , g]
involves both a s p i r a t i o n , t e n s e n e s s and voicing a s phonetic p a r a m e t e r s .
In initial s t r e s s e d position the a s p i r a t i o n , i. e. glottal relaxation is the ob-
vious c a u s e of t h e delay of voicing i n Lp, t , and k]. A higher i n t r a o r a l
s t o p p r e s s u r e , when p r e s e n t , a p p e a r s t o reflect a l a r g e r glottal opening

-:+ o r [ -"midclosure) instead of -consonantal].

STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 12.

r a t h e r than a higher subglottal p r e s s u r e . At the s a m e t i m e t h e r e a p p e a r s

to be a prolongation of the s t a t e of a r t i c u l a t o r y narrowing i n [ p, t, and k]
which accounts f o r a high frequency "fricative" noise superimposed on the
f i r s t p a r t of the aspiration.

T h e r e a r e a l s o coarticulation differences. The range of F 2 - l o c u s a t

the instant of r e l e a s e is g r e a t e r f o r t h e voiced than f o r the unvoiced s t o p s ,
especially s o with [b] compared with [p]. This c a n b e s e e n i n the d a t a
of Lehiste and P e t e r s o n (1961) and I have m e a s u r e d s i m i l a r distributions
f o r Swedish (forthcoming a r t i c l e ) . At the instant of r e l e a s e of [b) b e f o r e
a back vowel the tongue takes a position c l o s e t o that of the following vow-
el whilst the instant of r e l e a s e of the [p] before the s a m e vowel displays
a much higher locus, typical of n e u t r a l tongue articulation. After about
40 m s e c f r o m the r e l e a s e of the [ p ] the f o r m a n t p a t t e r n follows e s s e n t i a l l y
that observed immediately a f t e r the r e l e a s e of the [b]. These temporal
relations should b e studied c l o s e r .

It could b e , a s stated by Chomsky and Halle, that the amount of vocal

wall tensening could affect the possibility to maintain a prevoicing ( b e f o r e
the r e l e a s e ) but I c o n s i d e r the glottal adjustment to b e p r i m a r y and that i t
a l s o i s the p r i m a r y c a u s e of the s m a l l difference found i n the t i m e lag of
voicing a f t e r r e l e a s e comparing the intervocalic [k, p, t f and [ g , b, d ]
and a s s o c i a t e d with this t i m e lag a difference i n the F1 contour ( ~ cut
1 back).

The m e r e fact that t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n "tens e-lax" elements associated

with the distinction between the English o r Swedish [k, p, t] v e r s u s [b, d , g]
i n addition t o the obvious glottal adjustments i s not a sufficient b a s i s f o r s e l -
ecting the f e a t u r e "tense" r a t h e r than the f e a t u r e "vcice?!'. According t o
Chomsky and Halle the c r i t e r i o n f o r classifying [ p , t, k] a s [ + t e n s e ] r a t h e r
than [-voiced? would b e that vocal vibrations a r e stopped b e c a u s e of a r t i c -
ulatory i n t e r a c t i o n r a t h e r than by glottal relaxation. With this c r i t e r i o n I
would l a y a g r e a t e r i m p o r t a n c e in the voicing component than i n the t e n s e -
n e s s component. F u r t h e r studies a r e needed.

The f e a t u r e "distributed" which on the a r t i c u l a t o r y l e v e l i s defined a s

a long v e r s u s s h o r t c o n s t r i c t i o n in the d i r e c t i o n of the a i r flow has not b e e n
analyzed v e r y closely a s to i t s acoustic c o r r e l a t e s , and t h e s e a r e f a r f r o m
obvious. Differences i n s o u r c e location, s i z e of front cavity, and the d e -
g r e e of coupling t o the back cavities may b e affected. A high frequency ex-
tension of the noise could b e a n acoustic c o r r e l a t e but I cannot r e a l l y s a y
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 13.

anything definite b e f o r e I have studied actual s a m p l e s of s p e c t r o g r a m s and

cineradiograms. It a p p e a r s t o m e that the m a i n difference between l a b i a l s
and labiodentals is that of a l e s s effective v e r s u s a m o r e effective s o u r c e
and I a m r a t h e r hesitant t o equate i t with differences i n tongue articulations.

In Swedish t h e r e a r e both dental and apical a l v e o l a r s t o p s , the l a t t e r

being lexically induced by a previous /r/. The phonological component
would have t o w o r k with classifications that differentiate t h e s e articulations.
It i s indeed questionable whether the phonetic difference i s that of d i s t r i b -
uted-nondistributed.

Swedish vowels

The f e a t u r e "covered" pertaining t o n a r r o w e d , tensed pharynx wall and

a n elevated l a r y n x is suggested t o have s o m e relevance f o r the difference
between the Swedish vowels Ly] and [a]. T h e r e is no evidence to support
this suggestion a s f a r a s I c a n s e e .

The Swedish vowel s y s t e m is of considerable i n t e r e s t inview of the

l a r g e n u m b e r of sounds contained. I s h a l l attempt h e r e to c o n s t r u c t a phon- I
etic f e a t u r e m a t r i x of Swedish long vowel phonemes, [u:], [o:], [a:], C &:I,
[e:], [i:], Ly:], [u:], [&:I ,and the p r e - r allophones, [ae:] and [e:]of LC:]
and [b:], respectively. I shall f i r s t attempt t o u s e the Chomsky-Halle
tongue-body f e a t u r e s back, low, high, and the rounding feature. In addition,
I have defined two new f e a t u r e s , which i n the consistent a r t i c u l a t o r y t e r m i n -
ology a r e named "palatal" and "labial". T h e s e function a s e x t r e m e d e g r e e s
of tongue-height and lip-rounding, respectively. It has b e e n long recognized
that 211 Swedish long vowels of e x t r e m e low f i r s t formant frequency, [i:],
[Y:], [a:], and [u:] a r e pronounced a s diphthongs towards a homorganic
glide o r fricative. However, what is not s o obvious and often overlooked i s
that the vowel Ly:] is m a d e with a palatal closing g e s t u r e just a s i n [i:] but
with added lip- rounding and that the front vowel [w:] is produced with a
l a b i a l g e s t u r e towards c l o s u r e just a s i n the back vowel [u:], F a n t (1968).
T h e h i s t o r i c a l origin of [u:] i s a tongue fronting of [u:) which was replaced
b y a n Lo:] i n a vowel shift, In the Swedish spoken i n Finland Cu:] and [uc]
a r e not differentiated and a r e realized with a single sound shape. The
tongue fronting of the "long" [a:] has now p r o g r e s s e d t o a n articulation
c l o s e t o that of [i:], [y:], [ e:] , and [+:I, g e n e r a l l y a l i t t l e m o r e open
than [Y:] and a l i t t l e m o r e c l o s e than [b:]. As f a r a s I c a n judgd t h e
 STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 14.

element of velarization has been completely lostre. The position of the

m a s s of the tongue in the palatal-velar direction i s not m o r e "velar" than
that of the other front vowels, and the apex i s often slightly raised thus
tending t o shift the location of the tongue-palate constriction somewhat an-
t e r i o r of [i:]. However, in the c l a s s of "short", i. e. lax Swedish vowels,
**
the tongue of [u] is lower than that of [b] but m o r e velarized.

When sampling formant data on vowels the distinction between Swedish

[o:] and [u:] and between [b:] and [u:] may b e obscured i f [u:] and [u:]
a r e sampled a t t h e i r onset and not a t t h e i r t a r g e t values where F 1 and F2
a r e lower. Similarly, the contrast between [y:] and [a:] is i n c r e a s e d if
the sampling i s performed a t the l a t e r p a r t of the vowel w h e r e F2 of [u:]
has been progressively lowered and F3 of Cy:] has been progressively in-
creased. At the place of the vowel t a r g e t the main constriction is a t the
lips f o r [u:] and [u:] but a t the tongue-palate region f o r Cy:] and [i:].
The progressingly d e c r e a s i n g tongue-height in the s e r i e s [u:], [ o:], [ a :]
and in [i:], [ e : ] , [ E:] , [=:I and i n [u:], [b:], [ce:] is paralleled by a n in-
creasing jaw opening, Lindblom (1967). It has been demonstrated by
Lindblom and Sundberg (1969a and b) that with a minimum jaw opening but
otherwise n o r m a l tongue movements the F1 range is considerably reduced.
The jaw opening thus adds not only t o the tongue-palate distance but a l s o
t o the effective lip-opening, everything e l s e being equal. The oix vowel
f e a t u r e s classify the Swedish long vowels a s follows.

TABLE I-A-2

Swedish long vowels

[=:I and [a:] a r e p r e - r allophones of [E:] and [b:]
Binary s y s t e m
u: o: a: E: E: e: i: y: u: 6: a:
back + + + - - .. - - - - -
low - - + + - - - - - - -
high + - - . - + t + + + -
palatal - - - - - + + . - - -
round t t - - - - - + - ( + - t
labial t - - - - - - - t - -

* Lindblom and Sundberg (1969a) classified [u) a s "velar" but

expressed doubts a s t o the phonetic validity.
** The quality of s h o r t /u/ is generally t r a n s c r i b e d a s [el.
In the consonant s y s t e m the f e a t u r e should b e used instead of
[ + a n t e r i o r ] [ &coronal] to define the c l a s s of labial consonants. Labialized
vowels a r e analogous t6 " r e t r o f l e i " , i. e. [+coronal] vowels. Long (tense)
SwediSh vowels a r e accordingly diphthongized if they p o s s e s s the f e a t u r e s
"palatal" o r "labial1'. T h e s e a r e the maximally "close" vowels, c o m p a r e
Lindblom and Sundberg (1969 a).

An a l t e r n a t i v e m a t r i x m a y b e s e t up with "jaw c l o s u r e " instead of the

"palatal" f e a t u r e . The maximum d e g r e e of jaw c l o s u r e i s found in [i:],
[Y:], [u:], and [u:] which would be labeled [+closed]. With this solution
one gains the distinction i n actual t o n g u e - p l a t 1 5 opening comparing [u:]
and [+:I whilst the distinction between [u:] and Cy:] is reduced t c one of
labializatiox~only. One then has to add the r u l e that labialization always
d e t e r m i n e s the diphthongal element when p r e s e n t i n the c l o s e vowels.
Note the minimal distinction of [ - b a c k ] separating [w:] f r o m [u:] i n e i t h e r
system, A third and r a t h e r different a l t e r n a t i v e s y s t e m was suggested
by Lindblom and Sundberg (1 969 a).

The v a r i e t y of solutions possible i n a s y s t e m of i n t e r r e l a t e d physiolog- 1

i c a l dimensions s c a l e d according to b i n a r y principles i s indeed a problem.
One s o u r c e of variability is that the number of possible combinations gen-
e r a t e d f r o m a given ensemble i s l a r g e r than the number of sounds t o b e I
encoded. T h e r e f o r e t h e r e may r e s u l t a n ambiguity in f e a t u r e selection.
Two o r m o r e physiological p a r a m e t e r s m a y contribute t o one and the s a m e
a c o u s t i c a l and perceptual effect which may constitute a m o r e n a t u r a l
candidate f o r the r o l e of f e a t u r e , a t l e a s t i n the s e n s e of phonetic feature.
L e t u s s e e what happens if we t r y t o simplifjr the inventory of a r t i c u l a t o r y
p a r a m e t e r s by grouping together the f e a t u r e s "low", "high", and "palatal"
to one single dimension assigning the value 0 f o r the m o s t "open" d e g r e e s
[a:], [z:], and [ce:] and t h e value 3 f o r the maximally palatal [i:]. Sim-
i l a r l y the f e a t u r e labial i s added to that of rounding accounting f o r

TABLE I-A-3
u: o: a: z: : e: i: y: u: : a:
back 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
h i g h 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 3 2 2 0
round2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1

A m a t r i x of this s o r t i s e a s i e r t o comprehend than a multidimensional

b i n a r y system. T h e r e a r e apparently t h r e e m a j o r c l a s s e s within the s y s -
t e m , the b a c k vowels [u:], [o:], [a:] i n which a n i n c r e a s e i n tongue
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 16.

height goes with i n c r e a s i n g l i p rounding ( p a r t i a l l y jaw dependent). The

unrounded front vowels a r e differentiated by tongue (and jaw) height and
the rounded front vowels a r e a l s o differentiated by height and by e x t r a
rounding a s a s p e c i a l f e a t u r e of La:), cif. Malmberg (1 956) and F a n t (1966).

At t h i s s t a g e we might a s k f o r the acoustic and perceptual c o r r e l a t e s

of t h e s e a r t i c u l a t o r y c a t e g o r i e s . The phonetic c o l o r i s mainly dependent
of F I J F2' and F but it should b e possible to find a n optimal projection
3
of t h i s three-dimensional s p a c e on a plane. P i l o t experiments now i n pro-
g r e s s a t the Dept. of Speech Communication, KTH ( F a n t , C a r l s o n and
~ r a n s t r b m indicate
) that a n F1 v e r s u s F
2
'
plot would s e r v e this purpose.
FA is the frequency of the second f o r m a n t i n a two-formant approximation
to the vowel. In mid- and b a c k vowels F' is identical t o F2 and i n high
2
front vowels c l o s e to Fj.

A tentative Fversus plot of Swedish long vowels and s o m e s h o r t

1 2
vowels of specific identity have been plotted on a me1 s c a l e , Fig. I-A-4.
In this d i a g r a m we find evidence of a f a i r l y even s p r e a d i n the perceptual
domain. T h e a v e r a g e d i s t a n c e between any of the sounds and i t s c l o s e s t
neighbor i s 180 mels. is in-
The a r t i c u l a t o r y c o r r e l a t e of i n c r e a s i n g F
1
c r e a s i n g jaw opening and a shift of tongue place towards a pharyngeal
position. The a r t i c u l a t o r y c o r r e l a t e of the ordinate F'h is a shift of the
tongue away f r o m the velum and towards the palate.

It c a n b e s e e n that back vowels m a y b e s e p a r a t e d f r o m front vowels

by a line of the slope t45 d e g r e e s and rounded vowels f r o m unrounded
vowels with a line of -45 d e g r e e s slope. T h e r e f o r e a rotation of coord-
i n a t e s a s i n Fig. I-A-5 b r i n g s out the d i r e c t c o r r e l a t e s t o the m a i n vowel
classes. Back vowels a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a d i s t a n c e between the f i r s t
and the second f o r m a n t l o w e r than 400 mels. All unrounded front vowels
l i e c l o s e t o a line of M ~ + M ;= 2200 me1 and the rounded front vowels have
a n a b s c i s s a of Ml+M; l e s s than 2100 mel. The quantal s t e p s i n the o r d i -
nate comparing [i:, e:, E:, and z:] a r e of the o r d e r of 250-300 m e l s w h e r e
a s the quantal s t e p s in the a b s c i s s a a r e of the o r d e r of 200-250 m e l s .
Since we now have condensed the vowel s p a c e t o a plane we have only two
orthogonal p a r a m e t e r s .
I
The a b s c i s s a (Ivl1+M2) i s twice the c e n t e r of g r a v i t y of the s p e c t r u m ,
giving equal weight t o M1 and M ' and will b e identified with the negative
2'
- Labialization, velarization, jaw closing, l a r y n x
of the old f e a t u r e "flat".
STL-QPSR 2-3/1969 17.

lowering will a l l l o w e r the c e n t e r of gravity whilst the ordinate, h e r e

r e f e r r e d t o a s the s p e c t r a l f e a t u r e "spread" i s a m e a s u r e of d i s p e r s o n .
Note that it is related t o but not identical t o any of the old f e a t u r e s such
a s [ -compactness], [+diffuseness 1, o r [-gravity]. The s p e c t r a l s p r e a d
is i n c r e a s e d with moving the tongue f r o m a pharyngeal t o a palatal place
of articulation. F i v e levels a r e indicated by the points [a:], [ax], [ E:],
[e:], [i:]. Note that i n c r e a s i n g jaw opening i n c r e a s e s i n the f i r s t hand
M1 and thus m a k e s the s p e c t r u m l e s s flat and l e s s s p r e a d . Fig. I-A-5
would motivate a quantization of the long vowels i n s c a l e s of "flat" and
"spread" a s follows.
TABLE I-A-4
u: o: a: ce: E: e: i: y: at : Q: parameter
"spread" 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 2 2 1 M2-M1
"flat" 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 -(MI-2)

T h e s e s c a l e s a r e absolute but c a n of c o u r s e b e reduced according t o the

principle of complimetltary distributions. The p r o g r e s s i n g "flatness"
f r o m f r o m [a:] o v e r Lo:] t o [u:] i s t h e effect of rounding + velarization
w h e r e a s the flatness of [u:] i s p r i m a r i l y a m a t t e r of s m a l l l i p opening.
As previously d i s c u s s e i no velarization a p p e a r s to b e involved i n [u:]
but possible a n "anteriorization". The possibility of compensatory f o r m s
of articulations i n the flatness domain a r e apparent. In the c l a s s of "short"
i. e. l a x Swedish vowels, the /u/, phonetically [ o ] i s m o r e "velar" than
the short [b], s e e Fig. I-A-6. T h e s e facts support a p e r c e p t u a l r a t h e r
than a n a r t i c u l a t o r y feature b a s i s .

It h a s often been suggested that a r t i c u l a t o r y d e s c r i p t i o n s of vowels

actually r e l y on underlying perceptual classifications, Ladefoged (1 967b).
Our d a t a indicate that the Swedish vowels a r e not a r b i t r a r i l y spaced in-
dividuals i n the s p a c e of physically producible sounds but show a c l e a r
organization i n t e r m s of l i n e a r sequences and a tendency of equili3tant
spacings i n a n orthogonal perceptual space. This ordering appears to be
a s u b s e t of a language u n i v e r s a l s y s t e m of m a x i m a l c o n t r a s t . T h i s idea
w a s also e x p r e s s e d b y L i n d b l o ~ nan'3 Sunclbcrg (1 9 6 3 2). F u r t h e r work
along t h e s e l i n e s is continuing, E a r l i e r w o r k on me1 s c a l e mapping of
Swedish vowels was published by F a n t (1959).

r e f e r e n c e s on next page
 SWEDISH VOWELS
Feature "spread"

t o p a l a t a l place
- Jaw closing

I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1

- FEATURE "FLAT"
\ rnels

\
LABIALIZATION JAW OPENING
VELARIZATION VECTOR
JAW CLOSING (INCREASING Ft)
LARYNX LOWERING
(FORMANTS MOVING DOWN)

Fig. I-A-5. Swedish v o w e l s in a "spread" v e r s u s "flat" me1 scale plot

bringing out s o m e orthogonal vowel c a t e g o r i e s (back and
front v o w e l s ) and a trndency of equidistant me1 s p a c i n g s .
F i g . I-A-6. X - r a y t r a c i n g s of S w e d i s h vowels. ( ~ r o m F a n t , G. :
"The a c o u s t i c s of speech", i n P r o c . of t h e T h i r d
I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n g r e s s o n A c o u s t i c s , S t u t t g a r t 1 959,
pp. 188-201, F i g . 9, A m s t e r d a m 1 9 6 1 . )