1. Phonetics: More applicaitons Raung-fu Chung Southern Taiwan University rfchung@mail.nsysu.edu.tw

2. Fricatives: friction noises a. 私 [s  ] b. 詩 [  ] c. 西 [  i] d. she

3. Noise frequencies: Languages[s] [][][][][][] English40002000 Polish400025002000 Mandarin480031002700 Hakka50002000

4. Peaks of noises in LPC:

6. More on frictions:

7. Nasals:

8. Syllabic nasals: [m] [n] [  ]

9. Nasal + vowel: transition

10. Place reflected in transition:

11. Place matters:

12. Vowels + nasal= transition and place

13. Also place matters:

14. Nasalized vowels: nasal murmur / e  / / e / Nasal murmur

15. Nasalized vowels and nasal murmur

16. Freanch:/  / and /  /

17. Southern Min nasal murmurs

18. SM: ne  Nasal murmur

19. Nasalized by degrees?

20. SM nasalized vs. oral vowels in chart

21. Now: What can we do with phonetics? 1. one language, different speakers 2. across language: Mandarin vs. English Mandarin vs. Southern Min English vs. other languages Mandarin vs. other languages 3. acoustic phonetic studies

22. Case 1: VOT in EFL Topic: INTERLANGUAGE PRODUCTION OF ENGLISH STOP CONSONANTS: A VOT ANALYSIS

23. Methodology: Subjects: 20 EFL students –H EFL 5 girls (the age of 13 to 16) 5 boys (the age of 13 to 16) In the HEFL group, 9 subjects passed the basic of GEPT and the other passed Cave. 6 subjects came from the same public junior high school, 3 subjects came from Kaohsiung, and the other came from Yunlin.

24. –L EFL 5 girls (the age of 15 to 16) 5 boys (the age of 15 to 16) There is no one passing the GEPT. 9 subjects came from the same public high school in Yunlin County and the other came from a public vocational school in Yunlin County.

25. 6 NSEs (Native speaker of American English) –3 females (the age of 19 to 24) –3 males (the age of 19 to 24) 3 subjects came from Utah, 2 subjects came from Ohio, and 1 subject came from Washington D.C. They live in Taiwan for 5 months to 19 months, and the mean period is 9.4 months. They are missionaries. They speak Mandarin.

26. Instruments: Fill in a questionnaire –About subjects linguistic and education background. Reading Lists –English list 27 words –Mandarin list 16 words –/ ph, th, kh, p, t, k/ /i, u, a/ –Southern Min list 24 words –/ph, th, kh, p, t, k, b, g/ /i, u, a/

27. Sound Record program –Computer Praat –The program written by Paul Boersma and David Weenink Data Analysis: Get the VOT –Fetching the syllables –Storing to a new “WAV” file –Measuring VOT by Praat Make Worksheets –Using Excel program mean values standard deviations (SD) graphical representation The VOT values –SPSS 1. ANOVA tests

28. Results: 1. VOT production by the NSE group –The VOT values average 12.3, 22.2, and 36.0 msec for /p/, /t/, and /k/. –The VOT for /b, d, g/ and /p, t, k/ are similar. 2. VOT production in Mandarin by the EFL group –/p, t, k/ are short VOT value. –/p h, t h, k h / are long VOT value –/th/ is shorter than /ph/ –HEFL group in /p, t, k/ have shorter VOT values than LEFL group in Mandarin.

29. 3. VOT production in Southern Min by EFL group –EFL, in Southern Min, are produced with short lag with voiceless unaspirated. –Aspirated ones are produced with long lag. –There are less obvious between labial and alveolar stop in Southern Min. –Fast speech rate may get lower VOT value. 4. EFL student’s VOT production in English –/b/ and /g/ with negative VOT values in English –In HEFL group, voiced and voiceless unaspirated with shorter VOT values than LEFL. –Voiceless aspirated stops consistently with higher VOT values by HEFL than LEFL.

30. Summary:

31. Implications?

32. Case study 2: Mandarin fricatives

33. A peak comparison: American English and American Chinese

34. Korean vs. Korean Chinese

35. Questions?