簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 江 松
Jiang, Song
論文名稱： 北京官話與東北官話單元音兒化韻之構音現象的跨方言研究
A cross-dialectal articulatory study of Er-suffixed monophthongs in Beijing Mandarin and Northeastern Mandarin
指導教授： 謝豐帆
Hsieh, Feng-fan
口試委員: 張月琴
Chang, Yueh-chin
黃慧娟
Huang, Hui-chuan
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 人文社會學院 - 語言學研究所
Institute of Linguistics
論文出版年： 2020
畢業學年度： 108
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 80
中文關鍵詞： 語音音韻介面 、構音語音學 、電磁構音儀 、兒化 、官話方言
外文關鍵詞： Phonetics-phonology interface, Articulatory phonetics, Electromagnetic Articulography, Er-suffixation, Mandarin dialects
相關次數： 點閱：3  下載：0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 本篇論文利用NDI Wave電磁構音儀系統對北京官話和東北官話兩個臨近方言中兒化韻的構音特征進行了研究。
    本實驗的目的之一是對兒化韻的舌頭姿势和舌位運動描寫。本文將收集的兒化單元音的構音數據繪製成舌位變化圖，並採用Wieling (2018)的GAM模型與普通的單元音進行比較。構音數據表明，兒化韻的構音特征主要由前舌（TT/TB）動作和舌背（TD）動作。除此之外，在不同的環境下兒化韻會有兩種舌位運動的方式。在詞根的韻母為前元音/i, y/或舌尖元音/ɹ̩, ɻ̩/的情況下，舌頭表現為滑動（gliding）的動作。在詞根的韻母為後元音/u/的情況下，舌形會保持不變。兒化的/a/在北京官話和東北官話中表現不同。在北京官話中表現為滑動的舌位運動，而在東北官話中舌形則保持不變。
    隨後，本文針對北京官話和東北官話的舌態進行了比較。我們發現兩個方言內部舌態的一致性和兩個方言間舌態的差異性。本論文援用RA (Tiede 2019) 作為定義舌態的量化指標。北京官話語者的RA偏向負值，即相對傾向於採用舌尖翹起的舌態，而東北官話語者的RA偏向正值，即相對傾向於採用舌頁拱起的舌態。這樣的內部一致性和跨方言的差異性與我們熟知的英語的/r/的構音特征有著很大的不同。
    本文又對聲學的資料進行了分析。聲學的結果證實了「兒化韻雖因地域差異會由不同的舌態產生，但是聲學的表現存在一致性」的假設。
    基於上述的構音和聲學特征，本文針對兒化的音韻問題提出了基於構音音韻學（Articulatory Phonology）的解釋。TD動作對於與同時發生的發音動作上保持一致性有著更高的優先級。因此，有著舌根後退特征的後元音，例如/u/，與兒化韻的TD動作更加兼容。
    本研究對更好地呈現和理解兒化韻的構音特征方面做出了一定的貢獻。同時，本研究也發現前人提出的「r類音的舌態主要是個人差異而不是地域差異」的觀點可能不適用於官話的案例。

    This study investigates the articulatory characteristics of the Er-suffix (Erhua) in two close Mandarin dialects, Beijing Mandarin (BJM) and Northeastern Mandarin (NEM), using an NDI Wave Electromagnetic Articulography (EMA) system.
    One of the aims of this study is to depict the tongue posture and tongue movement of the Er-suffix’s articulation. The articulatory data of Er-suffixed monophthongs was plotted and compared with plain monophthongs using GAM statistics (Wieling 2018). The data shows that the articulation the Er-suffix is primarily composed of two gestures, the anterior lingual (TT/TB) gesture and the tongue dorsum (TD) gesture. Additionally, two types of tongue movements are found in distinct contexts. A gliding motion will happen when the root ends with a front vowel /i, y/ or an apical vowel /ɹ̩, ɻ̩/. The tongue shape will stay unchanged when the root ends with a back vowel /u/. Er-suffixed /a/ performs differently in BJM (gliding motion) and in NEM (unchanged tongue shape).
    Secondly, lingual configurations between BJM and NEM were compared. We found that there is an intra-dialectal consistency and a cross-dialectal difference in lingual configuration. The tongue retroflexion angle (RA; Tiede 2019) was introduced to define the lingual configuration as a measurement of tongue posture. BJM speakers prefer a relatively retroflex lingual configuration (negative RA), and NEM speakers prefer a relatively bunched lingual configuration (positive RA), which is very different from what we know about American English /r/.
    Furthermore, acoustic analysis was also conducted. The results confirmed our hypothesis that speakers from different regions may have different preferences when implementing the process of Er-suffixation, but the acoustic outputs are the same.
    Based on such articulatory and acoustic properties, an “Articulatory Phonology”-based account was assumed in this study to interpret the morpho-phonological issues of Er-suffixation. The TD gesture may have a higher priority regarding its agreement with the articulation simultaneously happening. Therefore, back vowels with a retracted tongue root, such as /u/, may be more compatible with the TD gesture of the Er-suffix.
    This study therefore contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of Er-suffixation from an articulatory perspective. It also challenges the previous perspective of rhotics that the preference of lingual configuration is a matter of individual variation rather than of regional effect, which seems inapplicable to the case of Mandarin in this study.

    ABSTRACT I 摘 要 III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS V TABLE OF CONTENTS VII LIST OF FIGURES IX LIST OF TABLES XI CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Beijing Mandarin and Northeastern Mandarin 1 1.1.1 Beijing Mandarin 2 1.1.2 Northeastern Mandarin 2 1.2 Er-suffixation 4 1.3 Research questions 5 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7 2.1 Transcription and phonological interpretation of Er-suffixation 7 2.2 Acoustic studies on Er-suffixation 10 2.3 Articulatory studies on Er-suffixation 14 2.4 Other related articulatory studies of r-like sounds 16 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS 18 3.1 EMA experiment 18 3.2 Participants 19 3.3 Materials 20 3.4 Data processing 21 3.4.1 Data correction 21 3.4.2 Annotation 22 3.5 Data analysis 22 3.5.1 Visualization 23 3.5.2 GAM analysis 24 3.5.3 RA measure 26 3.5.4 Acoustic analysis —— SSANOVA 27 CHAPTER 4 ARTICULATORY PATTERNS OF ER-SUFFIXED MONOPHTHONGS 28 4.1 Articulatory patterns of Er-Suffixed monophthongs in BJM 28 4.1.1 Er-suffixed front vowels /i, y, ɹ̩, ɻ̩/ in BJM 28 4.1.2 Er-suffixed non-front vowels /a, u/ in BJM 33 4.1.3 Er-suffixed non-front vowels /ɤ/ in BJM 36 4.2 Articulatory patterns of Er-Suffixed monophthongs in NEM 37 4.2.1 Er-suffixed front vowels /i, y, ɹ̩, ɻ̩/ in NEM 37 4.2.2 Er-suffixed non-front vowels /a, u/ in NEM 41 4.2.3 Er-suffixed non-front vowels /ɤ/ in NEM 44 4.3 Retroflexion Angle (RA) of the lingual configuration 44 4.4 Summary 47 CHAPTER 5 GAMM ANALYSIS OF THE TONGUE MOVEMENT OF ER-SUFFIXED MONOPHTHONGS 49 CHAPTER 6 ACOUSTIC PATTERNS OF ER-SUFFIXED MONOPHTHONGS 56 CHAPTER 7 DISCUSSION 64 7.1 Variability of lingual articulation of Er-suffix 64 7.2 Inter-dialectal difference and intra-dialectal consistency 65 7.3 Multi-gestural nature of the Er-suffix 66 7.4 Phonological account for the difference between front and back vowels 70 CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSION 74 8.1 Summary 74 8.2 Articulatorily based account for the Er-suffix in Mandarin 75 8.3 Residual problems 75 8.3.1 Whence the “articulatory uniformity” in Er-suffixation? 75 8.3.2 Whether Er-suffixed words in BJM and NEM are perceptually different? 76 8.3.3 A larger-scale study is required 76 REFERENCES 77

    Boersma, Paul. 2001. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 5:9/10, pp. 341-345.
    Boyce, S., Tiede, M.K., Espy-Wilson, C.Y., & Groves-Wright, K. 2015. Diversity of tongue shapes for the American English rhotic liquid. In The Scottish Consortium for ICPhS 2015 (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Paper no. 0847.
    Browman, C.P., Goldstein, L. 1992. Articulatory Phonology: An Overview. Phonetica 49 (3–4), pp. 155–180.
    Campbell, F., B. Gick, I. Wilson and E. Vatikiotis-Bateson. 2010. Spatial and temporal properties of gestures in North American English /r/. Language and Speech 53(1), pp. 49-69.
    Chao, Y.J. 1979. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    Delattre, P., Freeman, D. 1968. A dialect study of American R’s by X-ray motion picture. Linguistics, 44, pp. 29-68.
    Duanmu, S. 2007. The Phonology of Standard Chinese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Hamman, S. 2003. The Phonetics and Phonology of Retroflexes. Ph.D. dissertation. Utrecht: LOT Press.
    Hartman, Lawton M. 1944. The Segmental Phonemes of the Peiping Dialect. Language Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 28-42.
    He, W. 1986. Dongbei Guanhua De Fenqu [The subgrouping of Northeastern Mandarin]. Fangyan 1986 (3), pp. 172-181.
    Zhang, Z.M. 2005. Dongbei Guanhua De Fenqu [The subgrouping of Northeastern Mandarin]. Fangyan 2005 (2), pp. 141-148.
    Huang, Tsan. 2010. Er-suffixation in Chinese monophthongs: phonological analysis and phonetic data. NACCL-22 & IACL-18, 1, pp. 331-344.
    Gick, B. and I. Wilson. 2006. Excrescent schwa and vowel laxing: Cross-linguistic responses to conflicting articulatory targets. In L. Goldstein, D. H. Whalen & C. T. Best (eds.) Papers in Laboratory Phonology VIII: Varieties of Phonological Competence. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 635 – 660.
    Gu, Chong. 2002. Smoothing spline ANOVA models. Springer Series in Statistics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
    Gu, Chong. 2009. gss: General Smoothing Splines. R package version 1.0-5.
    Li, Si Jing. 1986. Hanyu ‘Er’ /ə˞/ Yinshi Yanjiu [A historical analysis of Chinese /ə˞/] Beijing: The commercial press.
    Lee, Wai-Sum, Zee, E. 2003. Standard Chinese (Beijing). Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33(01), pp.109-112
    Lee, Wai-Sum. 2005. A phonetic study of the "er-hua" rimes in Beijing Mandarin. In 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, pp. 1093-1096.
    Magnuson, T.J. 2007. The story of /r/ in two vocal tracts. In Saarbrücken: Proceedings 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, ICPhS 2007. Paper no. 1172.
    Norman, J. 1988. Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    R Development Core Team. 2009. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org, ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
    Shi, Feng. 2003. Acoustic expression of er-ized finals in Beijing Mandarin, Nankai Linguistics, 2, pp. 11-19.
    Tiede, M., Boyce, S.E., Espy-Wilson C.Y., & Gracco, V.L. 2007. Variability of North American English /r/ Production in response to Palatal Perturbation. Haskins Internal Workshop on Speech Production and Motor Control.
    Tiede. M., Chen, W.R., Whalen, D.H. 2019. Taiwanese Mandarin sibilant contrasts investigated using coregistered EMA and Ultrasound. In Sasha Calhoun, Paola Escudero, Marija Tabain & Paul Warren (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Melbourne, Australia 2019. Canberra, Australia: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association Inc.
    Wang, L.J. 1991. Yinxixue Jichu [Fundamental Phonology]. Beijing: Language & Culture Press.
    Wang, L.J., He, N.J. 1985. Beijing Hua Erhua Yun De Tingbian Shiyan He Shengxue Fenxi [Acoustic and perceptual research of Beijing Mandarin Er-suffixation]. Phonetic Experiments of Beijing Mandarin. Beijing: Peking University Press.
    Wang, Z.J. 1997. Erhuayun de Tezheng Jiagou [The featural geometry of r-rhymes.], Zhongguo Yuwen, 1, pp. 2-10.
    Van de Weijer, J.M.. 1991. Towards a theory of phonological complexity. Linguistics in the Netherlands 1991, pp. 141-150
    Westbury, J.R., Hashi, M., & Lindstrom, M.J. 1998. Differences among speakers in lingual articulation for American English /r/, Speech Communication, 26, pp. 203-226.
    Wieling, M. 2018. Analyzing dynamic phonetic data using generalized additive mixed modeling: a tutorial focusing on articulatory differences between L1 and L2 speakers of English. Journal of Phonetics, 70, pp. 86-116.
    Xu, Y. and Gao, H. (2018). FormantPro as a tool for speech analysis and segmentation. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem.
    Zhang, J. 2000. Non-Contrastive Features and Categorical Patterning in Chinese Diminutive Suffixation: "Max[F]" or "Ident[F]”?, Phonology, 17(3), pp. 427-478.
    Zhou, X., Espy-Wilson, C.Y., Boyce, S., Tiede, M., Holland, C., Choe, A. 2008. A magnetic resonance imaging-based articulatory and acoustic study of "retroflex" and "bunched" American English /r/. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123(6), pp. 4466-81

    QR CODE