Coronal Place Contrasts In Argentine And Cuban Spanish. An Electropalatographic Study

Coronal place contrasts in Argentine and Cuban Spanish. An electropalatographic study

Theoretical and descriptive work on Spanish phonetics and phonology has been largely

based on Peninsular varieties. This study uses electropalatography (EPG) to investigate

articulatory characteristics of coronal consonant contrasts in Argentine and Cuban Spanish.

Simultaneous EPG and acoustic data were collected from five speakers from Buenos Aires

(Argentina) and three speakers fromHavana (Cuba) reading sentences with various syllableinitial

coronal consonants corresponding to the orthographic t, ch, n, ˜n, s, z, ll, y, l, r. As

a control, the same data were collected from a single speaker of Peninsular Spanish from

Madrid. As expected, the main distinction in both varieties was made between anterior

and posterior coronal consonants ((denti-)alveolars vs. (alveolo-)palatals) and reflected

the historical merger of the sounds represented by s–z and ll–y. At the same time,

the results revealed some consistent differences between the two varieties in the location

of the constriction and the amount of linguopalatal contact for most coronal consonants.

First, the coronal consonants produced by the Argentine speakers were overall considerably

more fronted and more constricted than the corresponding consonants produced by the

Cuban speakers. Second, ll, y were produced as a fronted alveolo-palatal fricative by the

Argentine speakers, and as an approximant by the Cuban speakers. Inter-speaker variation

was observed within the varieties in the articulation of some consonants, namely in the

Argentine alveolo-palatal fricative and nasal (ll, y and ˜n), and the Cuban alveolo-palatal

affricate ch.

1 Introduction

Many previous phonetic and phonological studies of Spanish consonants have been based

primarily on auditory transcriptions and acoustic analysis (Navarro Tomas⁄ 1918, Alarcos

Llorach 1965, Quilis 1993). There have been very few articulatory investigations of Spanish,

and most of these works have been designed either to test specific hypotheses (Romero

1995, Honorof 1999, Lavoie 2001), or studied exclusively a single variety, Peninsular Spanish

(Fernan⁄ dez Planas 2007,Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ &Fernan⁄ dez Planas 2007). The precise realization

of Spanish consonant contrasts, the extent of phonetic variation across other varieties of

Spanish, and differences between these varieties and Peninsular Spanish are still relatively

poorly understood. Given this, there is a strong need for cross-dialectal phonetic studies

to support or reject previous generalizations. This study uses electropalatography (EPG)

to investigate articulatory characteristics of coronal consonant contrasts in two relatively

Journal of the International Phonetic Association (2011) 41/3 C  International Phonetic Association

doi:10.1017/S0025100311000338

314 Alexei Kochetov & Laura Colantoni

understudied varieties of Spanish – Argentine Spanish from Buenos Aires and Cuban Spanish

from Havana. The focus of the study is on place and manner of articulation, and specifically

on similarities and differences between Argentine and Cuban Spanish, as well as between

these two varieties and Peninsular Spanish.

1.1 Coronal contrasts in Spanish

1.1.1 Inventory and realizations

The consonant inventory of Standard Peninsular Spanish is presented in Table 1 (based on

Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ , Fernan⁄ dez Planas & Carrera Sabate⁄ 2003; see also Navarro Tomas⁄ 1918,

Quilis 1993). This variety has 12 coronal consonants (highlighted in the table) that fall into

three general place classes (dental, alveolar, and palatal) and seven manner classes (plosive,

affricate, nasal, tap, trill, fricative, and lateral approximant). These consonants are illustrated

in the list just below Table 1 (also from Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ et al. 2003: 255). There are some

additional, non-contrastive differences in place and tongue shape: /θ/ is interdental, /t d/ are

laminal denti-alveolars (i.e. [t5 d5]), while /n s l R r/ are apical alveolars. In certain contexts,

/d/ is realized as an interdental approximant [ð4]. The voiced palatal phoneme /Ô/ (or /¢/

depending on the analysis) is realized as an affricate after a pause, a nasal, or [l] ([elj "Ôat5e]

el yate ‘the yacht’), and as a palatal approximant [ ¢] in all other contexts ([mi " ¢ate] mi yate

‘my yacht’ (Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ et al. 2003: 258). Although works on phonology and phonetics

still include the palatal lateral /¥/ as part of the consonantal inventory of Peninsular Spanish,

in most varieties this phoneme has merged with /Ô/ and is being realized as a palatal affricate

or approximant, depending on the characteristics of the preceding context, as in the case of

/Ô/ (Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ et al. 2003; Hualde 2005: 180).

Table 1 Consonant inventory of Standard Peninsular Spanish and words illustrating coronal contrasts.

Bilabial Labiodental

Dental

(interdental

& dentialveolar)

Alveolar

(apical)

Palatal

(alveolopalatal

&

palatal) Velar

Plosive p b t d k g

Affricate  Ô

Nasal m n ¯

Tap R

Trill r

Fricative f θ s x

Lateral

approximant l (¥)

/t/ ["t5opo] topo ‘mole’ // ["koe] coche ‘car’

/d/ [d5aR] dar ‘to give’ /Ô/ ["Ôat5e] yate ‘yacht’

/n/ ["nuka] nuca ‘nape’ /¯/ ["ka¯a] ca˜na ‘cane’

/θ/ ["θona] zona ‘zone’ /s/ ["sola] sola ‘alone’

/R/ ["peRo] pero ‘but’

/r/ ["pero] perro ‘dog’

/l/ [luθ] luz ‘light’ /¥/ [a"¥i∼a" ¢i] all´ı ‘there’

The classification of Standard Peninsular Spanish consonants shown in Table 1 is largely

uncontroversial and goes back to the early descriptive phoneticwork byNavarro Tomas⁄ (1918),

Coronal place contrasts in Argentine and Cuban Spanish 315

whose observations were in part based on static palatography.1 Much of the subsequent

phonetic (mainly acoustic) and phonological work on Spanish has maintained its focus

primarily on the Peninsular variety, while other varieties, and particularly Latin American

Spanish, have received considerably less attention. One of the main well-known differences

between Standard Peninsular Spanish and Latin American varieties of Spanish, such as

Argentine and Cuban, is the absence of the dental/alveolar contrast in fricatives, /θ/ vs.

/s/ (represented in orthography by za, zo, zu, ce, ci and s). While in the northern and

central parts of Spain the original Medieval Spanish affricates /ts dz/ and fricatives /s z/

have evolved into /θ/ vs. /s/, respectively, in southern Spain, the Canary Islands, and Latin

America all four consonants have merged into a single fricative phoneme, generally /s/ (e.g.

Lloyd 1994). As a result of this merger, for example, the initial consonants in zona ‘zone’ and

sola ‘alone’ are pronounced with [s]: [sona] and [sola] (see examples immediately below

Table 1 above). The realization of /s/ in the ‘merging’ varieties is usually laminal rather than

apical (Martın⁄ ez Celdran⁄ et al. 2003: 258). The interdental realization of both za, zo, zu, ce,

ci and s is also attested in some varieties, including those spoken in parts of Cuba (e.g.

[θona] and [θola]). This phenomenon is referred to as ceceo (‘the use of [θ]’, as opposed

to seseo ‘the use of [s]’; Quilis 1993: 283–286; Navarro Tomas⁄ 1918: Section 106). Most

Latin American varieties are also characterized by a consistent merger of the lateral and

non-lateral palatals /¥ Ô/ (orthographically represented as ll, y), the phenomenon known

as ye´ısmo (Quilis 1993: 314–321; Navarro Tomas⁄ 1918: Section 106).2 As a result, both

original consonants are realized as [Ô] or [ ¢] depending on the context, as in innovative

varieties of Peninsular Spanish (see above). In Argentine Spanish, however, the consonant

is an alveolo-palatal fricative /Z/ or /S/, with the voicing or voicelessness of the consonant

being sociolinguistically conditioned (e.g. [Zate] or [Sate], [a"Zi] or [a"Si]; Wolf & Jimen⁄ ez

1979, Wolf 1984). Among other differences in coronals is the variable realization of the

palatal affricate (the orthographic ch) as an affricate [] or a fricative [S]. The latter variant

is attested intervocalically in Caribbean Spanish (Cuban, Dominican Republic, and Puerto

Rican), as well as in some South American varieties, such as Chilean (Quilis 1993: 302–304).

Some additional differences have been observed in the realization of rhotics, including the

assibilated realization of trills in several Latin American varieties (Bradley 1999, Colantoni

2001) and the neutralization of the lateral–rhotic contrast in codas, in particular in Caribbean

Spanish (see Quilis 1993, Hualde 2005). Overall, however, there is little information on

cross-dialectal differences involving coronal consonants. In

...