Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T11:50:28.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

/u/-Fronting and Agent-Based Modeling: The Relationship Between The Origin and Spread of Sound Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Jonathan Harrington  and
Florian Schiel
Jonathan Harrington*
Affiliation:
Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich
Florian Schiel*
Affiliation:
Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich
*
[jmh@phonetik.uni-muenchen.de] (Harrington) [schiel@phonetik.uni-muenchen.de] (Schiel)
[jmh@phonetik.uni-muenchen.de] (Harrington) [schiel@phonetik.uni-muenchen.de] (Schiel)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study is concerned with whether an asymmetric phonetic overlap between speaker groups contributes to the directional spread of sound change. An acoustic analysis of speakers of Southern British English showed that younger speakers’ fronted /u/ was probabilistically closer to that of older speakers’ retracted /u/ distributions than the other way around. Agent-based modeling based on the same data showed an asymmetric shift of older toward younger speakers’ fronted /u/. The general conclusion is that sound change is likely to be propagated when a phonetic bias within an individual is further magnified by a difference between speaker groups that is in the same direction.

Keywords

sound changeagent-based modelingvowelsspeech dynamicsimitation

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 93 , Issue 2 , June 2017 , pp. 414 - 445
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Babel, Molly. 2012. Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics 40. 177–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.09.001.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babel, Molly, McGuire, Grant, Walters, Sophia; and Nicholls, Alice. 2014. Novelty and social preference in phonetic accommodation. Laboratory Phonology 5. 123–50. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom, Tillery, Jan; and Sand, Lori. 1991. The apparent time construct. Language Variation and Change 3. 241–64. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394500000569.10.1017/S0954394500000569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Adam, Archangeli, Diana; and Mielke, Jeff. 2011. Variability in American English s-retraction suggests a solution to the actuation problem. Language Variation and Change 23. 347–74. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394511000135.10.1017/S0954394511000135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, Gareth J., Blythe, Richard A., Croft, William; and McKane, Alan J.. 2009. Modeling language change: An evaluation of Trudgill's theory of the emergence of New Zealand English. Language Variation and Change 21. 257–96. DOI: 10.1017/S095439450999010X.10.1017/S095439450999010XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, Mary e., Li, Fangfang, Kong, Eun Jong; and Edwards, Jan. 2014. Aligning the timelines of phonological acquisition and change. Laboratory Phonology 5. 151–94. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beddor, Patrice Speeter. 2009. A coarticulatory path to sound change. Language 85. 785–821. DOI: 10.1353/lan.0.0165.10.1353/lan.0.0165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter. 2012. Perception grammars and sound change. The initiation of sound change: Perception, production, and social factors, ed. by Solé, Maria-Josep and Recasens, Daniel, 37–55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.323.06bedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, Patrice Speeter, Harnsberger, James d.; and Lindemann, Stephanie. 2002. Language-specific patterns of vowel-to-vowel coarticulation: Acoustic structures and their perceptual correlates. Journal of Phonetics 30. 591–627. DOI: 10.1006/jpho.2002.0177.10.1006/jpho.2002.0177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, Juliette, and Wedel, Andrew. 2009. Inhibited sound change: An evolutionary approach to lexical competition. Diachronica 26. 143–83. DOI: 10.1075/dia.26.2.01ble.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Browman, Catherine, and Goldstein, Louis. 1992. Articulatory phonology: An overview. Phonetica 49. 155–80. DOI: 10.1159/000261913.10.1159/000261913CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bybee, Joan L., and Beckner, Clay. 2010. Usage-based theory. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, ed. by Heine, Bernd and Narrog, Heiko, 827–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0032.Google Scholar
Cannadine, David. 1998. Class in Britain. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Chitoran, Ioana, and Hualde, José Ignacio. 2007. From hiatus to diphthong: The evolution of vowel sequences in Romance. Phonology 24. 37–55. DOI: 10.1017/S095267570700111X.10.1017/S095267570700111XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clopper, Cynthia G. 2014. Sound change in the individual: Effects of exposure on crossdialect speech processing. Laboratory Phonology 5. 69–90. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Felicity, and Palethorpe, Sallyanne. 2001. The changing face of Australian English vowels. English in Australia (Varieties of English around the world G26), ed. by Blair, David and Collins, Peter, 17–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Delvaux, Véronique, and Soquet, Alain. 2007. The influence of ambient speech on adult speech productions through unintentional imitation. Phonetica 64. 145–73. DOI: 10.1159/000107914.10.1159/000107914CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Docherty, Gerard J., and Foulkes, Paul. 2014. An evaluation of usage-based approaches to the modelling of sociophonetic variability. Lingua 142. 42–56. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.01.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drager, Katie. 2011. Sociophonetic variation and the lemma. Journal of Phonetics 39. 694–707. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.08.005.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.08.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drager, Katie, Hay, Jennifer; and Walker, Abby. 2010. Pronounced rivalries: Attitudes and speech production. Te Reo 53. 27–53.Google Scholar
Drager, Katie, and Kirtley, Joelle. 2016. Awareness, salience, and stereotypes in exemplar-based models of speech production and perception. Awareness and control in sociolinguistic research, ed. by Babel, Anna M., 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duda, Richard o., Hart, Peter E.; and Stork, David G.. 2001. Pattern classification. 2nd edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 1989. The whole woman: Sex and gender differences in variation. Language Variation and Change 1. 245–67. DOI: 10.1017/S095439450000017X.10.1017/S095439450000017XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagyal, Zsuzsanna, Swarup, Samarth, Escobar, Anna Maria, Gasser, Les; and Lakkaraju, Kiran. 2010. Centers and peripheries: Network roles in language change. Lingua 120. 2061–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.02.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Carol A. 2005. Parsing coarticulated speech in perception: Effects of coarticulation resistance. Journal of Phonetics 33. 199–213. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2004.10.003.10.1016/j.wocn.2004.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fridland, Valerie. 2008. Patterns of/uw/,/u/, and/ow/fronting in Reno, Nevada. American Speech 83. 432–54. DOI: 10.1215/00031283-2008-030.10.1215/00031283-2008-030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Andrew, and Johnson, Keith. 2013. Phonetic bias in sound change. Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization, ed. by Yu, Alan C. L., 51–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573745.003.0003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, Nigel. 2007. Agent-based models. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Gordon, Elizabeth, Campbell, Lyle, Hay, Jennifer, Maclagan, Margaret, Sudbury, Andrea; and Trudgill, Peter. 2004. New Zealand English: Its origins and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Hoole, Phil, Kleber, Felicitas; and Reubold, Ulrich. 2011. The physiological, acoustic, and perceptual basis of high back vowel fronting: Evidence from German tense and lax vowels. Journal of Phonetics 39. 121–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.006.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Kleber, Felicitas; and Reubold, Ulrich. 2008. Compensation for coarticulation,/u/-fronting, and sound change in Standard Southern British: An acoustic and perceptual study. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 123. 2825–35. DOI: 10.1121/1.2897042.Google ScholarPubMed
Harrington, Jonathan, Kleber, Felicitas, Reubold, Ulrich; and Stevens, Mary. 2016. The relevance of context and experience for the operation of historical sound change. Toward robotic socially believable behaving systems, vol. 2: Modeling social signals, ed. by Esposito, Anna and Jain, Lakhmi C., 61–85. Basel: Springer.Google Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Kleber, Felicitas; and Stevens, Mary. 2016. The relationship between the (mis)-parsing of coarticulation in perception and sound change: Evidence from dissimilation and language acquisition. Recent advances in nonlinear speech processing, ed. by Esposito, Anna, Faundez-Zanuy, Marcos, Esposito, Antonietta M., Cordasco, Gennaro, Drugman, Thomas, Solé-Casals, Jordi, and Morabito, Francesco Carlo, 15–34. Basel: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, Jonathan, Palethorpe, Sallyanne; and Watson, Catherine I.. 2000. Does the Queen speak the Queen's English? Nature 408. 927–28. DOI: 10.1038/35050160.10.1038/35050160CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, Sarah, and Midgley, Jonathan. 2005. Formant frequencies of RP monophthongs in four age groups of speakers. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 35. 183–99. DOI: 10.1017/S0025100305002124.10.1017/S0025100305002124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, and Drager, Katie. 2010. Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics 48. 865–92. DOI: 10.1515/ling.2010.027.10.1515/ling.2010.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, and Foulkes, Paul. 2016. The evolution of medial/t/over real and remembered time. Language 92. 298–330. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2016.0036.10.1353/lan.2016.0036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Pierrehumbert, Janet, Walker, Abby; and LaShell, Patrick. 2015. Tracking word frequency effects through 130 years of sound change. Cognition 139. 83-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.012.10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.012.10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.012.10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.012.10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Warren, Paul; and Drager, Katie. 2006. Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics 34. 458–84. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001.10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henton, Caroline. 1983. Changes in the vowels of received pronunciation. Journal of Phonetics 11. 353–71.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30835-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hombert, Jean-Marie, Ohala, John J.; and Ewan, William G.. 1979. Phonetic explanations for the development of tones. Language 55. 37–58. DOI: 10.2307/412518.10.2307/412518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacewicz, Ewa, and Fox, Robert Allen. 2012. The effects of cross-generational and cross-dialectal variation on vowel identification and classification. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 131. 1413–33. DOI: 10.1121/1.3676603.10.1121/1.3676603CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jannedy, Stefanie, and Weirich, Melanie. 2014. Sound change in an urban setting: Category instability of the palatal fricative in Berlin. Laboratory Phonology 5. 91–122. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0005.10.1515/lp-2014-0005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909. A modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 1: Sounds and spelling. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Kerswill, Paul. 2003. Dialect levelling and geographical diffusion in British English. Social dialectology: In honour of Peter Trudgill, ed. by Britain, David and Cheshire, Jenny, 223–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kirby, James P. 2013. The role of probabilistic enhancement in phonologization. Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization, ed. by Yu, Alan C. L., 228–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kirby, James P. 2014. Incipient tonogenesis in Phnom Penh Khmer: Computational studies. Laboratory Phonology 5. 195–230. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0008.10.1515/lp-2014-0008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, James P., and Sonderegger, Morgan. 2013. A model of population dynamics applied to phonetic change. Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2013), 776–81. Online: https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2013/papers/0160/.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2. 205–54. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394500000338.10.1017/S0954394500000338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 1: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83. 344–87. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Susan, Beddor, Patrice Speeter; and Coetzee, Andries. 2014. Gestural reduction, lexical frequency, and sound change: A study of post-vocalic/l/. Laboratory Phonology 5. 9–36. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0002.10.1515/lp-2014-0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindblom, Björn, Guion, Susan, Hura, Susan, Moon, Seung-Jae; and man, Raquel Willer-. 1995. Is sound change adaptive? Rivista di Linguistica 7. 5–36.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn, and Studdert-Kennedy, Michael. 1967. On the role of formant transitions in vowel recognition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 42. 83043. DOI: 10.1121/1.1910655.10.1121/1.1910655CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDougall, Kersty, and Nolan, Francis. 2007. Discrimination of speakers using the formant dynamics of/u:/in British English. Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Saarbrücken, 1825–28. Online: http://www.icphs2007.de/conference/Papers/1567/.Google Scholar
Milroy, James, and Harris, John. 1980. When is a merger not a merger? The meat/mate problem in a present-day English vernacular. English World-Wide 1. 199–210. DOI: 10.1075/eww.1.2.03mil.10.1075/eww.1.2.03milCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James, and Milroy, Lesley. 1993. Real English: The grammar of English dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Munson, Ben, Beckman, Mary; and Edwards, Jan. 2012. Abstraction and specificity in early lexical representations: Climbing the ladder of abstraction. The Oxford handbook of laboratory phonology, ed. by Cohn, Abigail, Fougeron, Cécile, and Huffman, Marie, 288–309. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Niedzielski, Nancy. 1999. The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18. 62–85. DOI: 10.1177/0261927X99018001005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Kuniko. 2011. Specificity and abstractness of VOT imitation. Journal of Phonetics 39. 132–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.007.10.1016/j.wocn.2010.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Kuniko. 2014. Phonetic imitation by young children and its developmental changes. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 57. 2065–75. DOI: 10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-13-0093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolan, Francis, McDougall, Kirsty, Jong, Gea de; and Hudson, Toby. 2006. A forensic phonetic study of ‘dynamic’ sources of variability in speech: The DyViS Project. Proceedings of the 11th Australian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 13–18.Google Scholar
Nosofsky, Robert. 1992. Exemplars, prototypes, and similarity rules. From learning theory to connectionist theory: Essays in honor of William K. Estes, ed. by Healy, Alice, Kosslyn, Stephen, and Shiffrin, Richard, 149–67. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1981. The listener as a source of sound change. Chicago Linguistic Society (Parasession on language and behavior) 17 (2). 178–203.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1993. The phonetics of sound change. Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives, ed. by Jones, Charles, 237–78. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ohala, John J. 2012. The listener as a source of sound change: An update. The initiation of sound change: Perception, production, and social factors, ed. by Solé, Maria-Josep and Recasens, Daniel, 21–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.323.05ohaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J., and Feder, Deborah. 1994. Listeners’ normalization of vowel quality is influenced by ‘restored’ consonantal context. Phonetica 51. 111–18. DOI: 10.1159/000261963.10.1159/000261963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, Jennifer s., Gibbons, Rachel, Suppes, Alexandra; and Krauss, Robert m.. 2012. Phonetic convergence in college roommates. Journal of Phonetics 40. 190–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2011.10.001.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, Jennifer S., Jay, Isabel Cajori; and Krauss, Robert Μ.. 2010. Conversational role influences speech imitation. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 72. 2254–64. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196699.10.3758/BF03196699CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2001. Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition, and contrast. Frequency effects and the emergence of linguistic structure, ed. by Bybee, Joan L. and Hopper, Paul J., 137–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.45.08pieCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2002. Word-specific phonetics. Laboratory phonology 7, ed. by Gussenhoven, Carlos and Warner, Natasha, 101–39. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2003a. Phonetic diversity, statistical learning, and acquisition of phonology. Language and Speech 46. 115–54. DOI: 10.1177/00238309030460020501.10.1177/00238309030460020501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2003b. Probabilistic phonology: Discrimination and robustness. Probabilistic linguistics, ed. by Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay, and Stefanie Jannedy, 177228. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2006. The next toolkit. Journal of Phonetics 34. 516–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2006.06.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet b., Stonedahl, Forrest; and Daland, Robert. 2014. Amodel of grassroots changes in linguistic systems. arXiv:1408.1985v1 [cs.CL]. Online: https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.1985.Google Scholar
Quené, Hugo. 2013. Longitudinal trends in speech tempo: The case of Queen Beatrix. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 133. 452–57. DOI: 10.1121/1.4802892.10.1121/1.4802892CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sankoff, Gillian, and Blondeau, Hélène. 2007. Language change across the lifespan:/r/in Montreal French. Language 83. 560–88. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0106.10.1353/lan.2007.0106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebanz, Natalie, Bekkering, Harold; and Knoblich, Günther. 2006. Joint action: Bodies and minds moving together. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10. 70–76. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.009.10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shockley, Kevin, Richardson, Daniel C.; and Dale, Rick. 2009. Conversation and coordinative structures. Topics in Cognitive Science 1. 305–19. DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01021.x.10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01021.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silverman, Daniel. 2006. The diachrony of labiality in Trique, and the functional relevance of gradience and variation. Laboratory phonology 8, ed. by Louis Goldstein, D. H. Whalen, and Best, Catherine T., 133–54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Solé, Maria-Josep. 2014. The perception of voice-initiating gestures. Laboratory Phonology 5. 37–68. DOI: 10.1515/lp-2014-0003.10.1515/lp-2014-0003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sóskuthy, Márton. 2015. Understanding change through stability: A computational study of sound change actuation. Lingua 163. 40–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.05.010.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, James N., and Kenny, Laurence A.. 2013. Revisiting transmission and diffusion: An agent-based model of vowel chain shifts across large communities. Language Variation and Change 25. 119–53. DOI: 10.1017/S0954394513000069.10.1017/S0954394513000069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traunmüller, Hartmut. 1990. Analytical expressions for the tonotopic sensory scale. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 88. 97–100. DOI: 10.1121/1.399849.10.1121/1.399849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1999. Dialect contact, dialectology and sociolinguistics. Cuadernos de Filología Inglesa 8. 1–8.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2004. Dialect contact and new-dialect formation: The inevitability of colonial Englishes. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2008. Colonial dialect contact in the history of European languages: On the irrelevance of identity to new-dialect formation. Language in Society 37. 241–54. DOI: 10.1017/S0047404508080287.10.1017/S0047404508080287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, Trudgill.. 2010. Contact and sociolinguistic typology. The handbook of language contact, ed. by Hickey, Raymond, 299–319. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter, Gordon, Elizabeth, Lewis, Gillian; and Maclagan, Margaret. 2000. Determinism in new-dialect formation and the genesis of New Zealand English. Journal of Linguistics 36. 299–318.10.1017/S0022226700008161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Son, Rob J. J. h., and Pols, Louis C. W.. 1990. Formant frequencies of Dutch vowels in a text, read at normal and fast rate. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 88. 1683–93. DOI: 10.1121/1.400243.10.1121/1.400243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, Catherine, and Harrington, Jonathan. 1999. Acoustic evidence for dynamic formant trajectories in Australian English vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106. 458–68. DOI: 10.1121/1.427069.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wedel, Andrew B. 2006. Exemplar models, evolution and language change. The Linguistic Review 23. 247–74. DOI: 10.1515/TLR.2006.010.10.1515/TLR.2006.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedel, Andrew B. 2007. Feedback and regularity in the lexicon. Phonology 24. 147–85. DOI: 10.1017/S0952675707001145.10.1017/S0952675707001145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William; and Herzog, Marvin. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Directions for historical linguistics, ed. by Lehmann, Winfred and Malkiel, Yakov, 95–105. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Wolfram, Walt, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie. 2003. Dialectology and diffusion. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. by Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D., 71335. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar