Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-7drmj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-03T16:44:11.000Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phonetics of White Hmong vowel and tonal contrasts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2021

Marc Garellek
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego mgarellek@ucsd.edu
Christina M. Esposito
Affiliation:
Macalester College esposito@macalester.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hmong languages, particularly White Hmong, are well studied for their complex tone systems that incorporate pitch, phonation, and duration differences. Still, prior work has made use mostly of tones elicited in their citation forms in carrier phrases. In this paper, we provide a detailed description of both the vowel and tone systems of White Hmong from recordings of read speech. We confirm several features of the language, including the presence of nasal vowels (rather than derived nasalized vowels through coarticulation with a coda [ŋ]), the description of certain tone contours, and the systematic presence of breathy and creaky voice on two of the tones. We also find little evidence of additional intonational f0 targets. However, we show that some tones vary greatly by their position in utterance, and propose novel descriptions for several of them. Finally, we show that $\textrm{H}1^{\!*}$–H2*, a widely used measure of voice quality and phonation in Hmong and across languages, does not adequately distinguish modal from non-modal phonation in this data set, and argue that noise measures like Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) are more robust to phonation differences in corpora with more variability.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the International Phonetic Association
Figure 0

Table 1 White Hmong vowel inventory (monophthongs only).

Figure 1

Table 2 White Hmong tonal inventory.

Figure 2

Table 3 Biographical information about the speakers in the corpus.

Figure 3

Figure 1 F1~F2 space in Hz for the oral and nasal monophthongal vowels. Ellipses represent 68$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 4

Table 4 Monophthong means and standard deviations (SD) of F1, F2, and duration.

Figure 5

Figure 2 Duration of monophthongal vowels. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 6

Figure 3 Trajectory of diphthongs over vowel thirds, overlaid on F1~F2 space in Hz for the oral monophthongal vowels. Ellipses represent 68$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean for monophthongs.

Figure 7

Figure 4 Mean A1–P0 (in dB) over the course of the first, middle, and final thirds of the vowel. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean. Lower values indicate greater acoustic nasality.

Figure 8

Figure 5 Mean f0 (in semitones, base = 200 Hz) over the course of the first, middle, and final thirds of the vowel by tone, represented using Chao numerals and their orthographic symbol. The mid-level tone is represented here with an ‘x’ but is unmarked in the orthography. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 9

Figure 6 Mean f0 (in semitones, base = 200 Hz) over the course of the first, middle, and final thirds of the vowel for the non-productive -d tone and other low-register tones, represented using Chao numerals and their orthographic symbols. The mid-level tone is represented here with an ‘x’ but is unmarked in the orthography. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 10

Figure 7 Mean f0 (in semitones, base = 200 Hz) over the course of the vowel by tone and position in utterance (Initial, Medial, Final). The mid-level tone is represented here with an ‘x’ but is unmarked in the orthography. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 11

Table 5 Means (first third-last third) and overall standard deviations (SD) of tone’s f0, according to utterance position.

Figure 12

Figure 8 H1*–H2* (x-axis) by CPP (y-axis) measurements for the two high-falling tones. The bottom-right of each facet represents the breathiest acoustic quality. Ellipses represent 68$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 13

Figure 9 H1*–H2* (x-axis) by CPP (y-axis) measurements for the two low tones. The bottom-left of each facet represents the creakiest acoustic quality. Ellipses represent 68$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 14

Figure 10 Duration of tones in utterance-medial position, grouped by oral monophthongal vowels. Error bars represent bootstrapped 95$\%$ confidence intervals about the mean.

Figure 15

Table 6 Proposed revisions to White Hmong tone descriptions.