Emphatic Consonants of Modern Standard Arabic and Effects on Vowel Height, Backness, and Dispersion

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 1

Emphatic Consonants of Modern Standard Arabic: Effects on Vowel Height, Backness and

Dispersion

Ghadi AlGhoul

University of Toronto, Scarborough

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 2

Introduction

In phonetic analysis, it is known that vowel quality is affected by its environment. That is, a

vowel’s quality varies depending on the place or manner of articulation of a preceding or

succeeding consonant. Given that emphatic consonants are unique to Semitic languages like

Arabic, this paper will observe how vowel quality is affected by an emphatic consonant

environment in Modern Standard form of Arabic. Arabic, an Afro-Asiatic Semitic language

spoken in various regions of the Middle East1, possesses the emphatic consonants /tˤ, dˤ, ðˤ, sˤ/, and

the pharyngeal consonants /ḥ, ʕ/. The level these consonants constrict the pharynx at varies. For

instance, while emphatic consonants have pharyngealization as a secondary articulation,

pharyngeal consonants have pharyngealization as a primary articulation (Laufer & Baer, 1988).

As for the vowels, it is well observed in the literature that the Modern Standard variation of Arabic

has a triangular 3 vowel system that retains the vowels /a, i, u/ and their lengthier variations /a:, i:,

u:/ (Newman & Verhoeven, 2002).

A handful of studies in the literature observed the linguistic issues of pharyngeal and

emphatic consonant production in Arabic2. For instance, a study by Walter (2006) observed the

effects of pharyngealization on vowel quality in the Maltese dialect of Arabic. Still, since the study

was more phonological in nature, it could not expand phonetic knowledge of vowel production in

a pharyngealized consonant environment. In addition, it did not really account for how vowel

quality was affected by emphatic sounds. That said, there are only a handful of studies in the

literature that specifically observe the effect of emphatic consonants on Arabic vowels. More

importantly, studies seldom focus their observation on how one emphatic consonant preceding a

1 There are multiple variants of Arabic, such as the Levantine and Maltese dialects. These dialects are often mutually intelligible. Modern Standard Arabic used in professional settings. Still it retains a similar phonetic inventory. 2 That is, debating whether or not emphatic consonants are really pharyngealized.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 3

vowel affects its frontness and backness qualities and its lengthier counterpart in MSA. Lastly,

none of the studies observed the dispersion of the vowels preceded by the emphatic consonant.

Given this gap in the literature, it is of significance to study how MSA’s emphatic consonants can

influence MSA vowel quality. That said, the present paper observes how vowel quality, specifically

the frontness, backness and the vowel dispersion in MSA are affected when preceded by the

emphatic consonant /sˤ/.

A thesis paper by Anani (1980) concluded that vowel quality appeared to be centralized and

more back when occurring in an environment with an emphatic consonant. Taking Anani’s finding

into account, it is predicted that the vowel height and backness will be affected by the emphatic

consonant /sˤ/, such that the values of vowel height will be lowered and the vowel backness will

be raised to match the qualities of the emphatic consonant. It is further hypothesized that emphatic

consonants preceding the vowel will raise the F1 value and lower the F2 value of the vowel of

interest. Lastly, it is also predicted that vowels will disperse more in the emphatic environment

more than they will in the non-emphatic environment.

Methods

Speaker Information

Data was collected from one participant, a 20-year-old female bilingual in Arabic and

English. The participant is a native Arabic speaker who grew up speaking a Palestinian dialect of

Arabic. She was taught MSA for 20 years and has been exposed to it through her surrounding

environment (e.g. television, internet, etc.). Given that the participant was brought up in the United

Arab Emirates, she has acquired many Arabic dialects. That said, she is most fluent in the

Palestinian and modern standard dialects of Arabic.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 4

Data Collection

Data was recorded using a built in MacBook Pro recorder. All data were recorded in a quite

closed room using Praat’s Mono recording feature. This feature was used to maintain the reception

of the speaker’s voice. The speaker was distanced about 10 cm away from the recorder. Three trials

were recorded per word, all collected at around the same time. For efficiency purposes, Praat’s text

grid feature was used to illustrate word and segment boundaries. The text grid was saved per

“.wav” file to ensure that there was always a backup file in the case of an unforeseen technical

error. To collect the data, the participant was instructed to read from a prepared word list (Figure

1). The word list contained minimal and near minimal pairs of words containing /sˤ/ and /s/

preceding all the 3 MSA vowels and their lengthier variations. The carrier sentence used mainly

demonstrative determiners to elicit a sentence similar to “This is a _____” or “They/ He/She is

______” in MSA.

Figure 1. Shown here is the word list of minimal and near-minimal pairs of words containing /sˤ/ and /s/ preceding all the 3 MSA vowels and their lengthier variations. The carrier sentence used mainly demonstrative determiners to elicit a sentence similar to “This is a ___” or “They/ He/ She is ____” in MSA.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 5

Acoustic Analysis Methods

Vowel Height and Backness. The acoustic analysis methods used for this paper varied from

an F1 average range measurement to an F2 average range measurement per trial. The data was

organized in a Microsoft Excel sheet that specified: i. the word, ii. whether the preceding consonant

was emphatic or not, iii. the length of the vowel, iv. the F1 per trial, v. the average F1, vi. the F2

per trial, and vii. the average F2. The average F1 and F2 were calculated using the average formula

in Excel. Four clustered column Graphs were carried out, 2 Graphs illustrated the Vowel Height

(F1) in the Emphatic /sˤ/ and Non-Emphatic /s/, respectively; while, 2 Graphs illustrated the Vowel

Backness (F2) in the Emphatic /sˤ/ and Non-Emphatic /s/, correspondingly. Duration was not

considered as a numerical value but rather it was taken into account qualitatively as long or short.

Vowel Dispersion. The F1 values of the Formant plots have been carried out on Excel

through the use of the Graphs option and through using the X-Y Graph Labeler for Mac. This

allowed for the labeling of the respective vowels on the Graph. A formant plot was carried out to

observe the general dispersion of vowel qualities in the environment of the emphatic consonant

/sˤ/ and another formant plot was drawn to observe the dispersion of vowel qualities in the

environment of the non-emphatic /s/. To observe the change of vowel dispersion in the

environment of the emphatic consonant /sˤ/ and in the environment of its non-emphatic equivalent

/s/ a formant plot containing both data was plotted.

Results

Acoustic Analysis: Vowel Height

Graph 1 shows height of the vowels. The vowel height, represented by the first formant (F1

in Hz), varied slightly for some vowels and greatly for other vowels across the two environments.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 6

/i/ vs. /i:/ The short high front vowel /i/, had the least F1 change from the non-emphatic

environment /s/ to the emphatic environment /sˤ/, when compared to the other vowels.

Interestingly, its variation, /i:/ had a similar change. In contrast, the F1 of /i/ decreased slightly in

the emphatic environment while that of /i:/ slightly increased in the emphatic environment.

/a/ vs. /a:/. The F1 of the short low front vowel /a/ increased significantly in the emphatic

environment (i.e. an F1 value of about 200 Hz greater than that of the non-emphatic value). The

F1 of its lengthier counterpart /a:/ decreased slightly in the emphatic environment.

/u/ vs. /u:/. On the other hand, the F1 values of the remaining high back vowels /u/ and its

lengthier variations /u:/ were consistent, in the sense that the vowel and its long variation both

increased in the emphatic environment. Both had an F1 difference value of 100 Hz for /u/ and /u:/.

Graph 1. Vowel height in emphatic /sˤ/ versus non-emphatic /s/ environment. Vowel Backness

Graph 2 shows the backness of the vowels, with vowel backness represented by the second

formant F2 in Hz. The F2 values varied slightly for some vowels and greatly for other vowels

across the two environments, an observation similar to that of the findings in F1, i.e. vowel height.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 7

/i/ vs /i:/. The effect of the emphatic consonant on the backness of the short high front vowel

/i/ and its lengthier variant /i:/ appears to be the reverse of its effect on the F1 value, vowel height.

In this case, the F2 value for /i/ is higher in the emphatic environment /sˤ/, yet lower in the case of

the vowel /i:/. It is worth noting that there is a significant change in the backness of the /i:/ vowel

in which the difference between the F2 in an emphatic environment and the F2 in a non-emphatic

environment was about 300 Hz. It can be deduced that the vowel /i/ possesses a more front quality

in the emphatic environment whilst the vowel /i:/ possesses a more back quality when preceded

by the emphatic consonant /sˤ/ as opposed to that of the non-emphatic consonant /s/.

/a/ vs. /a:/. The F2 of the low front vowels /a, a:/ decreased for both in the emphatic

environments. The shorter variation /a/ had a highly significant drop in F2, a value of about 1,000

Hz, in the emphatic environment. The longer variation /a:/ also had a significant drop in F2,

however, less dramatic. The drop in F2 of the vowel /a:/ was of about 250 Hz. It can be inferred

that the vowels /a, a:/ became more back when preceded by the emphatic consonant /sˤ/.

/u/ vs. /u:/. Likewise, the F2 value of the high back vowels /u, u:/ dropped in the emphatic

environment. The short variation of the vowel showed a slight drop in F2 value, whilst, the long

variation /u:/ showed a relatively significant drop of about 200 Hz when preceded by the emphatic

consonant /sˤ/. Therefore, it can be observed that both the vowels /u/ and /u:/ become more back

when preceded by the emphatic consonant /sˤ/.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 8

Graph 2. Vowel backness in Emphatic /sˤ/ versus Non-Emphatic /s/ environment. Vowel Dispersion

/i/ vs. /i:/. The vowel dispersion of the high front vowels /i, i:/ in the non-emphatic

environment did not vary greatly in the emphatic environment. The short vowel /i/, as observed on

Graph 3.a and 3.b was lower in height than /i:/. The long vowel /i:/ was by far more front in the

emphatic and non-emphatic environments. As observed in Graph 3.c the dispersion of vowel /i/

seems to be slightly offset in the emphatic environment when compared to that of the non-emphatic

environment. In contrast, /i:/ appeared to disperse more due to the F2 change of about 200 Hz.

Nevertheless, /i, i:/ dispersed nicely, and did not transcend from one location to another

haphazardly.

/a/ vs. /a:/. As for the vowel dispersion in the low front vowels /a, a:/ there seemed to be

quite a noticeable variation. The long vowel /a:/ in Graphs 3.a and 3.b maintained a relatively

similar position and did not disperse radically in Graph 3.c. However, the short vowel /a/ dropped

significantly from its original position near the long high front vowel /i:/ to a position roughly

above the short high back vowel /u/ in empathic environments. It is evident that /a/ was dispersed

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 9

most amongst the other vowels, however, this can be inferred to the place of articulation and the

secondary pharyngealization nature of the emphatic /sˤ/.

/u/ vs. /u:/. The short vowel /u/ and the long vowel /u:/ shifted slightly in the formant plot

(Graph 3.a and 3.b). Both maintain a relative distance that is similar in the emphatic and non-

emphatic environment as shown in Graph 3.c. Like /i, i:/ the shift seems predictable. The vowel

/u/ had a higher F1 in the emphatic environment that has caused the noticeable dispersion, while,

the vowel /u:/ had a drop in F2 in the emphatic environment to which the shift may be inferred to.

Graph 3. a. Vowel dispersion in Non-Emphatic environment, /s/. The presumed triangular vowel system of Classical Arabic was slightly rendered in the production of MSA vowels.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 10

Graph 3. b. Vowel dispersion in Emphatic environment, /sˤ/. The triangular shape of the vowel system is almost preserved.

Graph 3. c. It is evident that all the MSA vowels, excluding /a/, tend to be more stable, predictable and consistent in change. Blue shows the vowel dispersion due to emphatic /sˤ/ environment, while, purple the non-emphatic /s/ environment.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 11

Discussion

The present study observed how vowel quality (i.e. frontness, backness and dispersion) in

Modern Standard Arabic is influenced by the emphatic consonant /sˤ/. It was observed that the

emphatic consonant /sˤ/ altered the F1 and F2 values of the 3 MSA vowels and their longer

variations. The alteration in F1 and F2 values caused some vowel dispersion as a result.

To elaborate, the high F1 values found for /a, i:, u, u:/ suggest that the respective vowel

heights were lowered. Still, the F1 value of /a:/ and /i/ was slightly lowered in the emphatic

environment, suggesting that the vowel height slightly increased for both /a:/ and /i/. Nevertheless,

the drop in F1 value can be attributed to technical error during recording or phonetic analysis.

While most vowel heights were lowered, it appears that frontness was increased in the

emphatic environment. It was predicted earlier that the value of vowel backness will be increased

in order to assimilate to the qualities of the emphatic consonant. That said, it was indirectly inferred

that a lowered F2 will result. This prediction was confirmed in almost all the vowels, in which F2

had a lower value in the emphatic environment. Nevertheless, /i/ appeared to have a slightly higher

F2, indicating more frontness in the emphatic environment. Again, since the trend in F2 value

slightly deviated from the other vowels, the increase in F2 value can be attributed to technical error

during recording or phonetic analysis.

Lastly, it was predicted that vowels will disperse more in the emphatic environment /sˤ/

than they will in the non-emphatic environment /s/. That was observed in the study and applied to

all the vowels. It is of interest to mention that Anani’s paper (1980) suggests that the presence of

MSA vowels next to an emphatic consonant caused a more centralized production. It is unclear

what caused the vowel centralization to occur. It would be of interest to decode this phenomenon

through a follow-up study, wherein vowel centralization is the sole focus.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 12

One limitation of the present study is the lack of focus on one vowel and its longer variant

across different emphatic environments. To reiterate, it may be the case that studying one vowel

and its longer variant across multiple emphatic environments, like /tˤ, dˤ, ðˤ, sˤ/, would provide

more detailed and precise results. This is because it could provide an aggregated profile of F1 and

F2 values that in turn will influence vowel dispersion.

MSA VOWEL QUALITY 13

References

Anani, M. (1980). Some Phonetic Differences between Arabic and English Vowels. STUF -

Language Typology And Universals, 33(1-6). doi: 10.1524/stuf.1980.33.16.709

Laufer, A., & Baer, T. (1988). The Emphatic and Pharyngeal Sounds in Hebrew and in

Arabic. Language And Speech, 31(2), 181-205. doi: 10.1177/002383098803100205

Newman, D., & Verhoeven, J. (2002). Frequency analysis of Arabic vowels in connected speech.

Antwerp papers in linguistics, 100, 77-86.

Walter, M. A. (2006). Pharyngealization Effects in Maltese Arabic. Current Issues in Linguistic

Theory, 161–178. https://doi.org/10.1075/CILT.266.10WAL