Warning: file_put_contents(/opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/storage/proxy/cache/ef2c50a06b642096c6e423204e777a76.html): Failed to open stream: No space left on device in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php on line 36

Warning: http_response_code(): Cannot set response code - headers already sent (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 17

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 20
(PDF) Flapping In English
Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Previous Analyses of Flapping (8)
Conclusion
References

Flapping In English

Profile image of Bert VauxBert Vaux

2000, Linguistic Society of America, Chicago, IL

Abstract
sparkles

AI

The research investigates the phonetic and phonological properties of flapping in English, arguing for a nuanced understanding of syntactic boundaries and gender influences on flapping outcomes. It synthesizes contributions from various studies, noting how phonological processes like t-deletion and the characteristics of flaps are shaped by prosodic and contextual factors. Additionally, it critically examines existing theories and suggests areas for future research, particularly in exploring variability across dialects and further empirical validation of claims about flapping.

Related papers

Blocking of alveolar flapping in speech production: the role of syntactic boundaries and deletion sites
Carmen Egido

Journal of Phonetics, 1980

Experiments were conducted to examine the influence of syntactic boundaries on the operation of a phonological rule in speech production. Groups of ten or more speakers read sentences in which the phonological rule of Alveolar Flapping could be optionally applied across a word boundary. Experiment I showed that the occurrence of Flapping is blocked by major syntactic boundaries and that this blocking is not attributable to pausing. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the occurrence of flapping is markedly reduced when the key word boundary coincides with an embedded clause boundary but is unaffected by boundaries of other phrase types , including noun phrases and verb phrases. Traditional theories of bo undary strength , which assign equal weight to boundaries associated with different types of constituents, fail to account for these results. Finally, Experiment 3 showed that Flapping is also reduced in the environment of a syntactic deletion site. The results of these experiments indicate that traditional metrics of boundary strength, as well as linguistic formulations of phonological rules, must be elaborated to recognize the special status of clause boundaries and deletion sites. In speech processing, blocking appears to reflect a constraint on the speaker's ability to look ahead to consider phonetic information in the word-initial segment following the key word boundary. This information is required to satisfy the conditions under which the phonological rule can apply. The look-ahead capability of the speaker may be limited at word boundaries that coincide with clause boundaries and deletion sites because of the speaker's need to devote immediate processing capacity to the programming of other prosodic attributes typically accompanying these locations.

View PDFchevron_right
Flapping in North American Pronunciation: Case 1 'The Change of /t/ and /d/ into [D] in Pronunciation
Mehmet Demirezen

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 2006

The North American English is different from the British English in many pronunciation cases. One of these cases is known as flapping in the articulation of which the / t/ and /d/ phonemes are converted into a flap, whose sign is [D]. This pronunciation case is frequently heard in many TV broadcasts such as CNN, CNN International, and Voice of America. Flapping, triggered by a phonetic process called neutralization, causes a breakdown is communication. Even advanced students can be "confused with it" (Avery and Ehrlich 1992:42). The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the working mechanism of flapping and rehabilitate its pronunciation difficulty by a sample lessons operated by the audio-articulation method.

View PDFchevron_right
Corpus-based Noisy Harmonic Grammar modeling of word-medial /t/-flapping in American English
Cheonkam Jeong

Jeong, Cheonkam and Sung-Hoon Hong. 2017. Noisy Harmonic Grammar modeling of flapping in American English based on a statistical analysis. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 23.1. 117-143. This paper investigates the gradient aspect of flapping in American English, considering both the language internal factors stress and morphological complexity and the language external factor lexical frequency. To reflect the gradient aspect of flapping, flapping rates were regarded as dependent variables, and a statistical analysis was conducted with both language-internal and language-external factors. Due to the range of dependent variables [0, 1], a zero/one inflated beta regression was conducted. The results verified that the more frequent a carrier word containing a word-medial /t/ is, the more likely it is for the word-medial /t/ to be realized as a flap, and that the word-medial /t/ in a morphologically simple word is more likely to be realized as a flap than one in a morphologically complex word. Thereafter, Noisy Harmonic Grammar analyses were performed, and the extended version showed an improvement over the original model of 83.228%. (Hankuk University of Foreign Studies)

View PDFchevron_right
Individual variation in English flaps and taps: A case of categorical phonetics
Donald Derrick

The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La Revue Canadienne De Linguistique, 2011

View PDFchevron_right
Acoustic correlates of flaps in North American English
Donald Derrick

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2013

Using B/M mode ultrasound, identified four categorical variations of flaps in North American English, up-flaps, down-flaps, alveolar taps, and postalveolar taps produced in English. These variants can be used to test hypotheses about constraints on speech articulation, such as local context, gravity and elasticity, speech rate, and longer distance anticipatory coarticulation. This study examines acoustic correlates of flap variations in order to make connections between the results of larger, and easier to collect, acoustic databases and the tongue movements underlying flap productions. Preliminary analyses using smoothing spline ANOVAs of z-score normalized f0, F1, F2, F3, F4 and F5 indicate significant differences in each dependent variable for flaps in non-rhotic vowel contexts. The results for flaps adjacent to rhotic vowels is more complex, requiring more detailed analysis. Based on these results, we are currently planning supervised hierarchical clustering to aid in probabilistic identification of flap variants, with reference to both vocalic context and syllable structure.

View PDFchevron_right
Three speech sounds, one motor action: Evidence for speech-motor disparity from English flap production
Donald Derrick

The assumption that units of speech production bear a one-to-one relationship to speech motor actions pervades otherwise widely varying theories of speech motor behavior. This speech production and simulation study demonstrates that commonly occurring flap sequences may violate this assumption. In the word “Saturday,” a sequence of three sounds may be produced using a single, cyclic motor action. Under this view, the initial upward tongue tip motion, starting with the first vowel and moving to contact the hard palate on the way to a retroflex position, is under active muscular control, while the downward movement of the tongue tip, including the second contact with the hard palate, results from gravity and elasticity during tongue muscle relaxation. This sequence is reproduced using a three-dimensional computer simulation of human vocal tract biomechanics and differs greatly from other observed sequences for the same word, which employ multiple targeted speech motor actions. This outcome suggests that a goal of a speaker is to produce an entire sequence in a biomechanically efficient way at the expense of maintaining parity within the individual parts of the sequence. (C) 2015 Acoustical Society of America.

View PDFchevron_right
University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics
Nahed Mourad

The centralization of the low upgliding diphthong (typically called Canadian Raising, here just Raising), is frequently cited as an example of phonological opacity. Conditioned by a following voiceless segment, Raising continues to apply when an underlying unstressed/t/is flapped on the surface. Dialects which have both Raising and Flapping, then, maintain the distinction between “writer” and” rider” in the quality of the vowel, rather than the voicing of the stop.

View PDFchevron_right
Natural phonological processes at the one-word stage
Ruth Berman

Lingua, 1977

View PDFchevron_right
Applied english phonology answerkey
혜영 김
View PDFchevron_right
Part 2: Phonology
Roland Pfau

De Gruyter eBooks, 2017

Non-manuals 34 1.5.1 Mouth gestures 34 1.5.2 Mouthings 35 1.5.3 Other non-manuals 35 Elicitation materials 35 References 36 Chapter 2 Prosody 37 2.0 Definitions and challenges 37 2.0.1 What is prosody? 37 2.0.2 Prosodic markers 38 2.0.3 Methodological challenges 40 2.0.4 Outline of the chapter 41 2.1 The lexical level 41 2.1.1 Syllable 41 2.1.2 Foot 43 2.2 Above the lexical level 44 2.2.1 Prosodic word 45 2.2.2 Phonological phrase 47 2.2.3 Intonational phrase 47 2.2.4 Phonological utterance 49 2.3 Intonation 49 2.4 Interaction 50 2.4.1 Turn regulation 50 2.4.2 Back-channeling 51 Elicitation materials 51 References 51 Chapter 3 Phonological processes 53 3.0 Definitions and challenges 53 3.0.1 What is a phonological process? 53 3.0.2 Caveats 53 3.0.3 Outline of the chapter 54 3.1 Processes affecting the phonemic level 54 3.1.

View PDFchevron_right

References (79)

  1. Akmajian, Adrian, Richard Demers, and Robert Harnish (1984) Linguistics, 2d edition. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  2. Bauer, Laurie. 1986. Notes on New Zealand English phonetics and phonology. English World-Wide 7:225-258.
  3. Bauer, Laurie; Dienhart, Hartvigson, and Kvistgaard Jakobson. 1980. American English Pronunciation. Copenhagen.
  4. Beckman, Mary and Gayle Elam. 1997. Guidelines for ToBI Labelling, version 3. Ohio State University Research Foundation: http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/phonetics/ToBI/ ToBI.2.html.
  5. Bell, Allan. 1977. The language of radio news in Auckland: a sociolinguistic study of style, audience and subediting variation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.
  6. Bell, Allan. 1984. Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13:145-204.
  7. Bell, Allan. 1991. Audience and referee design in New Zealand media language. In Allan Bell and Janet Holmes, eds. New Zealand Ways of Speaking English. Wellington: Victoria University Press.
  8. Bloch, Bernard. 1941. Phonemic overlapping. American Speech 16:278-284.
  9. Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt.
  10. Bowen, J. Donald. 1989. Loss of Contrast between Voiced and Voiceless Alveolar Flapped Stops in American English. In General and Amerindian Ethnolinguistics: In Remembrance of Stanley Newman, Mary Key, Henry Hoenigswald, Philip Bock, and Harry Basehart, eds., 323-329. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  11. Bronstein, A. 1960 The pronunciation of American English. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Chambers. [on Canadian]
  12. Charles-Luce, Jan. 1997. Cognitive Factors Involved in Preserving a Phonemic Contrast. Language & Speech 40(3):229-48.
  13. Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Current issues in linguistic theory. Mouton: The Hague.
  14. Churma, Donald. 1990. At the Phonetics/Phonology Interface: (Re)syllabification and English Stop Allophony. ESCOL '90: Proceedings of the Seventh Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Yongkyoon No and Mark Libucha, eds., pp. 40-54.
  15. Clark, John and Colin Yallop. 1995. An Introduction to Phonetics and Phonology, 2d edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
  16. de Jong, Kenneth, Mary Beckman, and J. Edwards. 1993. The interplay between prosodic structure and coarticulation. Language and Speech 36:197-212.
  17. de Jong, Kenneth. 1998. Stress-Related Variation in the Articulation of Coda Alveolar Stops: Flapping Revisited. Journal of Phonetics 26(3):283-310.
  18. Egido, Carmen and William Cooper. 1980. Blocking of Alveolar Flapping in Speech Production: The Role of Syntactic Boundaries and Deletion Sites. Journal of Phonetics 8:175-84.
  19. Fisher, W. and I. Hirsch. 1976. Intervocalic flapping in English. Chicago Linguistic Society 12:183-198.
  20. Fox, R. and D. Terbeek. 1977. Dental flaps, vowel duration and rule ordering in American English. Journal of Phonetics 5:27-34.
  21. Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman. 1998. An introduction to language, sixth edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
  22. Fujimura, Osamu. 1986. Relative invariance of articulatory movements: an iceberg model. In Invariance and Variability in Speech Processes, J. Perkell and D. Klatt, eds., 226-234. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  23. Fujimura, Osamu, and Julie Lovins. 1977. Syllables in Concatenative Phonetic Units. Bloomington: Indiana University Lingusitics Club.
  24. Giegerich, Heinz. 1992. English Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Goman, Roderick. 1981. On the natural phonology of consonants. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 25:107-73.
  26. Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1986. English plosive allophones and ambisyllabicity. Gramma 10:119-141.
  27. Haugen, Einar. 1938. Notes on "voiced t" in English. Dialect Notes 6 (16-17):627-634.
  28. Harris, John. 1994. English Sound Structure. Oxford: Blackwell.
  29. Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical Stress Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  30. Holmes, Janet. 1994. New Zealand Flappers: An Analysis of T Voicing in New Zealand English. English World- Wide: a Journal of Varieties of English 15(2):195-224.
  31. Holmes, Janet. 1995. Two for /t/: Flapping and Glottal Stops in New Zealand English. Te Reo: Journal of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand 38:53-72.
  32. Iannucci, David et. al. 1968. Some determinants of stylistic phonological variation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 7.
  33. Inouye, Susan. 1989. The Flap as a Contour Segment. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 72:39-81.
  34. Inouye, Susan. 1995. Trills, Taps, and Stops in Contrast and Variation. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA. Joos, Martin. 1942. A phonological dilemma in Canadian English. Language 18:141-144.
  35. Kahn, Daniel. 1976. Syllable-based generalizations in English Phonology. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. (Published in 1980 by the Indiana University Linguistics Club.)
  36. Kenyon, J. 1940. American Pronunciation. Ann Arbor: George Wahr.
  37. Kiparsky, Paul. 1979. Metrical Structure Assignment is Cyclic. Linguistic Inquiry 10.421-441.
  38. Kreidler, C. 1989. The Pronunciation of English. Oxford: Blackwell.
  39. Ladefoged, Peter. 1993. A Course in Phonetics, 3rd edition. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  40. Laeufer, Christiane. 1989. French Linking, English Flapping, and the Relation between Syntax and Phonology. Studies in Romance Linguistics. Kirschner, Carl; DeCesaris, Janet (eds.), 225-47. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  41. Lee, Hikyoung. 1998. The Social and Stylistic Variation of Flapping. The Secol Review: Southeastern Conference on Linguistics 22(2):130-49.
  42. Lehmann, W. 1953. A note on the change of American English /t/. American Speech 28.4:271-275.
  43. Liberman, Mark and Alan Prince. 1977. On Stress and Linguistic Rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8:249-336.
  44. Lodge, K. 1984. Studies in the phonology of colloquial English. London: Croom Helm.
  45. Macchi, M. 1985. Segmental and Supersegmental Features and Lip and Jaw Articulators. Doctoral dissertation, NYU. Malecot, A. and P. Lloyd. 1968. The t:d distinction in American alveolar flaps. Lingua 19:264-272.
  46. McDavid, Raven. 1966. Review of Bronstein 1960. Language 42:149-155.
  47. Monnot, M. and M. Freeman. 1972. A comparison of Spanish single-tap /r/ with American /t/ and /d/ in post-stress intervocalic position. In Papers in Linguistics to the memory of Pierre Delattre, A. Valdman, ed., 409-416. Mouton: The Hague.
  48. Murray, Robert. 1987. Nuclear Phonology and Aspiration and Flapping in English. Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics 13:27-41.
  49. Napoli, Donna Jo. 1996. Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  50. Nespor, M. and Irene Vogel. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
  51. O'Grady, William, Michael Dobrovolsky, and Mark Aronoff. 1993. Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction, second edition. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  52. Oswald, V. 1943. Voiced t-a misnomer. American Speech 18:18-25.
  53. Parker, F. 1977. Perceptual cues and phonological change. Journal of Phonetics 5:97-105.
  54. Parker, Frank and Thomas Walsh. 1982. Blocking Alveolar Flapping: A Linguistic Analysis. Journal of Phonetics 10(3):301-314.
  55. Picard, Marc. 1984. English Aspiration and Flapping Revisited. Canadian Journal of Linguistics-Revue Canadienne de Linguistique 29(1):42-57. Downsview, ON, Canada.
  56. Picard, Marc. 1997. English Flapping and the feature [vibrant]. English Language and Linguistics 1.2. Price, Patti Jo. 1981. A Cross-Linguistic Study of Flaps in Japanese and in American English. Doctoral dissertation (Dissertation Abstracts International 42(3):1128A).
  57. Rimac, Robert and Bruce Smith. 1984. Acoustic Characteristics of Flap Productions by American English-Speaking Children and Adults: Implications Concerning the Development of Speech Motor Control. Journal of Phonetics 12(4):387-396.
  58. Roca, Iggy and Wyn Johnson. 1999. A course in phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
  59. Rogers, Henry. 1991.Theoretical and Practical Phonetics. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman.
  60. Scharf, D. 1962. Duration of post-stress intervocalic stops and preceding vowels. Language and Speech 5:26-30.
  61. Scott, Donia and Anne Cutler. 1984. Segmental Phonology and the Perception of Syntactic Structure. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior. 23(4):450-466.
  62. Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1982. The syllable. In Harry van der Hulst and Norval Smith, eds., The Structure of Phonological Representations, vol. 2, 337-384.
  63. Shockey, Linda. 1984. All in a Flap: Long-Term Accomodation in Phonology. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 46:87-95.
  64. Silverman, Daniel. 1998. Alveolar stops in American English, and the nature of allophony. NELS 28, Pius Tamanji and Kiyomi Kusumoto, eds., 425-435.
  65. Sivertson, Eva. 1960. Cockney Phonology. Oslo: University Press.
  66. Sloat, Clarence, Sharon Taylor, and James Hoard (1978) Introduction to Phonology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice- Hall, Inc.
  67. Spencer, Andrew. 1996. Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
  68. Stampe, David. 1973. A dissertation on natural phonology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago. [Published in 1979 by Garland.]
  69. Stone, Maureen and Sandra Hamlet. 1982. Variations in Jaw and Tongue Gestures Observed during the Production of Unstressed /d/s and Flaps. Journal of Phonetics 10:401-415.
  70. Thelwall, Robin. 1980. Trills and Flaps. Occasional Papers in Linguistics & Language Learning 7:79-84.
  71. Trager, George. 1942. The phoneme "t": a study in theory and method. American Speech 17:144-148.
  72. Trager, George and H. Smith. 1951. An outline of English structure. Washington: American Council of Learned Societies.
  73. Turk, Alice. 1992. The American English Flapping Rule and the effect of stress on stop consonant durations. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 7:103-133.
  74. Twadell, W. 1935. On defining the phoneme. Language Monographs no. 16. Baltimore: Waverly Press.
  75. Umeda, N. 1977. Consonant duration in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61:846- 858.
  76. Vaux, Bert. 1996. Aspiration, Flapping, and Glottalization in English. Manuscript, Harvard University.
  77. Withgott, Mary. 1982. Segmental Evidence for Phonological Constituents. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas.
  78. Wolfram, Walt and R. Johnson. 1982. Phonological Analysis: Focus on American English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. [chapter 7]
  79. Zue, V. and M. Laferriere. 1979. Acoustical study of medial /t, d/ in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66:1039-1050.

Related papers

PHONETIC EFFECTS ON AMERICAN ENGLISH FLAPPING: THE ROLE OF CONSONANT REPETITION
Mary Ann Walter

The American English phonological flapping rule results in the weakening of /t/ phonemes when isolated in onset position between stressed and unstressed syllables (obligatorily) or two unstressed syllables (optionally). The productivity of the flapping rule is already known to vary depending on several different factors. I present here a pair of phonetic production studies suggesting that consonant repetition is one of those factors. Flapping is dispreferred if a sequence of multiple flaps would result. In this paper I present a pair of production studies that demonstrate gradient variation in phonological rule application (North American English flapping). The use or non-use of the flapping rule depends partly on phonological goodness as measured by the degree of violation of the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP). Flapping is a characteristic rule of North American English in which /t/ phonemes are pronounced as flaps obligatorily when appearing as isolated consonants in onset position at the start of a syllable, when the preceding syllable is stressed and the syllable initiated by the flap is unstressed. An example is the /t/ phoneme in the word water. The orthographic /t/ must be pronounced as a flap rather than a full /t/. Flaps also are used optionally when they are isolated consonants in onset position between two unstressed syllables. An example is the /t/ phoneme in the word quality. The orthographic /t/ in this word may be pronounced as a full /t/ or as a flap. Flaps are much shorter in duration than full /t/ allophones, and voicing may continue throughout the production of the flap. Flaps are also typically retroflex. The following two spectrograms demonstrate the acoustic difference between full /t/ (Figure 1) and a flap (Figure 2). The location of each flap is indicated with an arrow underneath. Notice that even on a smaller time scale, the duration of the full /t/ in Figure 1 is of considerably longer duration than the flap indicated in Figure 2. In addition, the voicing bar is hardly interrupted for the flap in Figure 2, whereas the whiter space (indicating less noise) during the arrow-indicated interval is much more prominent in Figure 1 for the full /t/. Figure 1: Spectrogram of " a Tom, " produced with full /t/. Figure 2: Spectrogram of " atom, " produced with flap. Previous work has shown that American English speakers are alert to these cues and are highly reliable in identifying flapped versions of /t/ (Patterson and Connine, 2001). Such work has also identified several factors which influence the likelihood of flapping in optional contexts (between two unstressed syllables). In such contexts, flapping is sensitive to the presence of a morpheme boundary, lexical frequency, and speech rate (Patterson and Connine, 2001). Flapping is less likely when it coincides with a morpheme boundary within the word. Thus, all else being

View PDFchevron_right
Incomplete Neutralization in American English Flapping: A Production Study
Aaron Braver

University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 2011

This paper presents a production study of incomplete neutralization in American English flapping. In flapping, /d/ and /t/ both become a voiced flap in certain prosodic contexts (see, e.g., . A number of studies show that this neutralization is incomplete: /d/-flaps can be distinguished from /t/-flaps on the surface . Other studies, however, have found conflicting results . This study finds that flapping is an incompletely neutralizing process—/d/-flaps and /t/-flaps can be distinguished on the surface by the duration of the preceding vowel, at least for some speakers. Additionally, some studies find evidence that hyperarticulation and orthography have an effect on whether neutralization is complete or incomplete Iverson 1984, Warner et al. 2006). The present study employed two tasks: a minimal pair reading task, designed to increase these potential effects, and a morphological paradigm completion/"wug" task, designed to reduce these effects. No significant differences between the two tasks were found, thus failing to support the claim that incomplete neutralization is due to these extragrammatical factors.

View PDFchevron_right
English Aspiration, Glottalization, and Flapping Revisited
Bert Vaux

Ms, Harvard University, 1998

View PDFchevron_right
Noisy Harmonic Grammar Modeling of Flapping in American English Based on a Statistical Analysis
Cheonkam Jeong

MA thesis

This paper investigated the gradient aspect of flapping in American English, considering both the language internal factors stress and morphological complexity and the language external factor lexical frequency. To examine the gradient aspect of flapping, flapping rates were regarded as dependent variables, and a statistical analysis was conducted with both language-internal and language-external factors. Due to the range of dependent variables [0, 1], a zero/one inflated beta regression was conducted. Its result verified that the more frequent a carrier word containing a word-medial /t/ is, the more likely the word-medial /t/ is realized as a flap, and the word-medial /t/ in a morphologically simple word is more likely to be realized as a flap than in a morphologically complex one. Thereafter, Noisy Harmonic Grammar analyses were performed, and the extended version of them showed the improvement of the original model by 83.228%

View PDFchevron_right
An acoustic and perceptual analysis of/t/and/d/flaps in American English
Allard Jongman

Journal of Phonetics, 2010

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved