Allophones of American English Later studies have shown that articulatory strength is not completely irrelevant. The articulators in the mouth can move with a greater velocity [ 4 ] and / or with higher electromyographic activation levels of the relevant articulatory muscles [ 5 ] with fortis consonants than with lenis ones .Generally, voiceless stops have greater oral pressure than voiced ones, which could explain this greater articulatory energy. In Ewe, for example, the lips reach closure faster in articulating / p / than in / b /, making the lip closure longer. [ 6 ] Thes e differences in oral articulatory energy in consonants of different laryngeal settings is fairly widespread, though the correlation of energy and voicing is not universal. [ 7 ] Indeed, a number of languages have been proposed as making strength differences independently of voicing, such as Tabasaran, [ 8 ] Archi, [ 9 ] Udi, [ 10 ] and Aghul. [ 11 ]It is rare for the use of greater respiratory energy for segments to occur in a language, though some examples do exist, such as Korean, which makes a three way contrast amongst most of its obstruents with voiceless, aspirated, and a third faucalized voiced set that involves both an increase in subglottal pressure as well as greater glottal constriction and tenseness in the walls of the vocal tract. [ 12 ] Igbo has also been observed to utilize an increase in subglottal pressure involving its aspirated consonants. [ 13 ]
“Fortis” and “lenis” have also been used to refer to contrasts of consonant duration in languages like Jawoyn,[14] Ojibwe,[15] Dalabon, Kunwinjku,[16] and Zurich German.[17] The Zapotec languages are also considered to have contrast of length rather than of voicing.[18] For example, in Mixe, lenis consonants are not only pronounced shorter than their fortis counterparts, but they are also prone to voicing in voiced environments, which fortis consonants are not.
This association with longer duration has prompted some to propose a diachronic link between fortis consonants and gemination. [ 19 ] Payne ( 2006 ) even proposes that gemination is itself a process of fortition in Italian .Many North Caucasian languages ( Northwest and especially Northeast ) have a consonantal distinction described as ” strong ” or ” preruptive ” that has concomitant length. Akhvakh and other Northeast Caucasian languages even possess a distinction between strong / long and weak / short ejective consonants : [ qʼaː ] ( ‘ soup ‘ ) vs. [ qʼːama ] ( ‘ cock’s comb ‘ )Kodzasov ( 1977 ) describes the fortis consonants for Archi :Fortis stops in Australian Aboriginal languages such as Rembarunga ( see Ngalakgan ) also involve length, with short consonants having weak contact and intermittent voicing, and long consonants having full closure, a more powerful release burst, and no voicing. It is not clear if strength makes the consonants long, or if during long consonants there is a greater opportunity for full articulation .Articulatory strength can reinforce other distinctions. Ewe, for example, which contrasts a voiceless bilabial fricative / ɸ / and a voiceless labiodental fricative / f /, pronounces the latter markedly more strongly than / f / in most languages. [ citation needed ] This helps differentiate what would otherwise be a very subtle distinction .In English, use of the terms ” fortis ” and ” lenis ” is useful to refer to contrasts between consonants that have different phonetic attributes depending on context. The alveolar consonants / t / and / d /, for example :/ t / and / d /[21]
|
lenis
|
fortis
|
form
|
example
|
form
|
example
|
Word-initial
|
[ d ̥ ] |
[ ˈd ̥ ɑ ̆ k ̚ ] |
dock |
[ tʰ ] |
[ ˈtʰɑ ̆ p ̚ ] |
top
|
Syllable-final
|
[ ˈnɑd ̥ ] |
nod |
[ V ̆ t ̚ ] |
[ˈnɑ̆t̚]
|
knot
|
[ V ̆ ˀt ̚ ] |
[ ˈnɑ ̆ ˀt ̚ ]
|
[ V ̆ ʔ ] |
[ ˈnɑ ̆ ʔ ]
|
Stressed syllable-initial
|
[ d ] |
[ əˈdɑ ̆ pt ] |
adopt |
[ tʰ ] |
[ əˈtʰɑ ̆ p ̚ ] |
atop
|
Word-internal unstressed
|
[ Vɾ ] |
[ ˈɑɾɹ ̩ ][a] |
odder |
[ ɾ ] |
[ ˈɑ ̆ ɾɹ ̩ ] |
otter
|
[ V ̆ ɾ ] |
[ˈɑ̆ɾɹ̩]
|
Following [ s ][b] |
|
|
|
[ t ] |
[ ˈstɑ ̆ p ̚ ] |
stop
|