{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025157232704402517, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010062893081761006, 'mean_word_length': 5.26246719160105, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Using ultrasound to examine contrastive hyperarticulation

The current paper examines the extent to which there is cross-linguistic evidence for the hyperarticulation of more phonologically contrastive vowel sounds. Hall et al. [2017, JCAA 45: 15] found that tense vowels in English are produced with more total tongue movement when in positions where they are more phonologically contrastive. This finding was established through the use of Optical Flow Analysis [Horn & Schunck 1981] on ultrasound videos of the tongue. The “more contrastive” positions were those in which the vowels could contrast with their lax vowel counterparts, while the “less contrastive” positions were those in which no such contrast was possible. While there was evidence that the degree of contrast affected the tongue movements, the data were somewhat confounded by the fact that the more contrastive positions were largely closed syllables, while the less contrastive positions were largely open syllables. In the current paper, we first replicate the original results with more tightly controlled phonetic contexts in English and then examine analogous results for Canadian French. Crucially, in Canadian French, [e] vs. [ɛ] contrast in open syllables and not in closed, such that the effects of syllable position and phonological contrast can be teased apart. [Funded by SSHRC.]The current paper examines the extent to which there is cross-linguistic evidence for the hyperarticulation of more phonologically contrastive vowel sounds. Hall et al. [2017, JCAA 45: 15] found that tense vowels in English are produced with more total tongue movement when in positions where they are more phonologically contrastive. This finding was established through the use of Optical Flow Analysis [Horn & Schunck 1981] on ultrasound videos of the tongue. The “more contrastive” positions were those in which the vowels could contrast with their lax vowel counterparts, while the “less contrastive” positions were those in which no such contrast was possible. While there was evidence that the degree of contrast affected the tongue movements, the data were somewhat confounded by the fact that the more contrastive positions were largely closed syllables, while the less contrastive positions were largely open syllables. In the current paper, we first replicate the original results with more tightly controlled...