In American English, initial /bdg/ often lack the acoustic feature taken as the defining feature of voiced stops; intervocalically before unstressed vowel /ptk/ lack aspiration, without which initial stops are not labeled /ptk/. Initially, the two categories differ in the timing of vocal fold adduction and onset of fold vibration, and several acoustic cues, all tied to the VOT difference, have been studied. Medially there is also a difference in the management of the larynx, though it results in a phonetically simpler contrast, one of voicing with no accompanying aspiration difference. Acoustically, however, the list of features that play, or might plausibly play a role is quite large. The word pair rapid‐rabid, for example, might be affected by the following: (1) presence/absence of low‐frequency buzz during the closure interval, (2) duration of closure, (3) F1 offset frequency before closure, (4) F1 offset transition duration, (5) F1 onset frequency following closure, (6) F1 onset transition duration, (7) [æ] duration, (8) F1 “cut‐back” before closure, (9) F1 cutback following closure, (10) VOT cutback before closure, (11) VOT delay after closure, (12) F0 contour before closure, (13) F0 contour after closure, (14) amplitude of [i] relative to [æ], (15) decay time of glottal signal preceding closure, (16) intensity of burst following closure. Even if some of these should turn out to be perceptually negligible, enough of them surely have cue value to make it a formidable task to justify preferring an acoustic to an articulatory account of the distinction between the two English words. [The support of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development is gratefully acknowledged.]
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
December 1977
August 11 2005
Rapid versus rabid: A catalogue of acoustic features that may cue the distinction
L. Lisker
L. Lisker
Haskins Laboratories, 270 Crown St., New Haven, CT 06510
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104
Search for other works by this author on:
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 62, S77–S78 (1977)
Citation
L. Lisker; Rapid versus rabid: A catalogue of acoustic features that may cue the distinction. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1 December 1977; 62 (S1): S77–S78. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2016377
Download citation file:
Citing articles via
All we know about anechoic chambers
Michael Vorländer
A survey of sound source localization with deep learning methods
Pierre-Amaury Grumiaux, Srđan Kitić, et al.
Does sound symbolism need sound?: The role of articulatory movement in detecting iconicity between sound and meaning
Mutsumi Imai, Sotaro Kita, et al.
Related Content
Effects of first formant onset properties on voicing judgments of prevocalic stops without F1 cutback
J Acoust Soc Am (October 1999)
On generalizing the rabid‐rapid distinction based on silent gap duration
J Acoust Soc Am (August 2005)
Levels of decision in the perception of voicing contrasts
J Acoust Soc Am (August 2005)
The reliability of closure features as cues to medial stop voicing in English
J Acoust Soc Am (August 2005)
Trading relations in nonspeech
J Acoust Soc Am (August 2005)