Fig. 1. (Four panels) Plots of formant values at mid point of Vor VV for each of the four speakers. The ellipses enclose one standard deviation on each direction from the mean for each of the two formants. * For Spkr 2 one token of /ae/ and another one of /o/ were discarded. For Spkr 3 one token of /o/ was discarded. Durations for all speakers in ms., mean (S.D.) Table 1 Euclidean distance at mid point Table 3 Fig. 2. (Four panels) Plots of formant values at 25% point of Vor VV for each of the four speakers. The ellipses enclose one standard deviation on each direction from the mean for each of the two formants. The pairs of values that turned out not to be significantly different at mid point are identical for Spkrs 1 and 2. For F2, both /ae/ and /ea/ are similar to /e/. Again, the data for these two speakers are not consistent with the hypothesis of greater reduction of the higher vowel in the sequence. The clearest result for Spkrs 3 and 4 concerns the sequence /ea/, which shows convergence with /a/. In fact, as is apparent from Fig. 2 (below), already at the first measured point, 25% into the Vor VV, values for both formants for /ea/ are very close to /a/ for these two speakers. That is, from the beginning /ea/ approaches /a/. This suggests a deletion/assimilation strategy: /ea/ > [a]. Non-significant differences in formant values at 50% point Mean F1/F2 values in Hz at mid point: /e/, /eo/, /o/, /oe/ Table 5 From the duration results reported above, it appears that for these two speakers the duration of /ea/ is also not significantly different from that of /a/, again suggesting a strategy of V1 deletion. This deletion is consistent with Casali’s (1997:497) crosslinguistic finding that “‘at the boundary between two lexical words, elision is always of V1”. These two speakers’ data thus offer some support for Hypothesis II, at least regarding /ea/. Non-significant differences in formant values at 50% point Fl at 25% Fig. 3. (Four panels) Plots of formant values at 75% point of Vor VV for each of the four speakers. The ellipses enclose one standard deviation on each direction from the mean for each of the two formants. Appendix B (Continued )
Connect with 287M+ leading minds in your field
Discover breakthrough research and expand your academic network
![Fig. 2. (Four panels) Plots of formant values at 25% point of Vor VV for each of the four speakers. The ellipses enclose one standard deviation on each direction from the mean for each of the two formants. The pairs of values that turned out not to be significantly different at mid point are identical for Spkrs 1 and 2. For F2, both /ae/ and /ea/ are similar to /e/. Again, the data for these two speakers are not consistent with the hypothesis of greater reduction of the higher vowel in the sequence. The clearest result for Spkrs 3 and 4 concerns the sequence /ea/, which shows convergence with /a/. In fact, as is apparent from Fig. 2 (below), already at the first measured point, 25% into the Vor VV, values for both formants for /ea/ are very close to /a/ for these two speakers. That is, from the beginning /ea/ approaches /a/. This suggests a deletion/assimilation strategy: /ea/ > [a].](https://figures.academia-assets.com/33591521/figure_002.jpg)
