1. Essence of coarticulation
The vocal cords do not move from sound to sound in a series of separate steps. Speech is a continuously varying process, and sounds continually show the influence of their neighbours. Certain segments have a tendency to run together, extra sounds may be added to ensure smoothness of speech; some sounds adopt a less clearly defined phonetic form; and some completely disappear.
So the influence of a phonetic context upon the articulation of speech sounds is called coarticulation. Coarticulation may be also defined as the overlap of the articulotary movements for adjacent sounds, causing modifications of those sounds.
For example, if a nasal consonant ([m]) precedes an oral vowel ([a]), some of the nasality will carry forward, so that the onset (приступ) of the vowel will have somewhat nasal quality. The reason is simply that it takes time for the soft palate to move from its lowered position (required for [m]) to the raised position (required for [a]).
Therefore, we may single out two main reasons for coarticulation. Firstly, it happens due to the speaker’s desire to render the idea most quickly and effectively, thus to save time and effort.
The second reason is purely physiological, for it is connected with the degree of mobility of certain speech organs. E.g. the soft palate is less mobile than the tip of the tongue. That’s why [æ] in the word man is nasalized, as it is described before. These limitations of the speech organs are most clearly seen when we pronounce tongue-twisters. (КарлуКларыукралкораллы. Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled pepper).
2. Types of coarticulation processes
Adjacent sounds influence each other so that they become more alike, or assimilate. These effects are more common in rapid speech, but some degree of assimilation will be found in all spoken styles.
If the sound becomes more like a following sound, we are dealing with anticipatory (regressive).In the phrase ten balloons, [ten] is likely to be pronounced [tem], anticipating the following bilabial consonant. In the greeting good night, [gut] is usually pronounced [gun], as sometimes shown in writing: g’night.
In progressive (perseverative) assimilation, a sound is influenced by the sound which precedes it. The second word in bridge score would typically emerge as[∫ko:], because of the influence of the palatal element in the preceding affricate. Similarly, the second word in Church Street would be found as [∫tri:t].
A third possibility is coa’lescence – a reciprocal influence, where two sounds fuse into a single new one. In won’t she, the final [t] and initial [∫] mutually assimilate to produce [t∫], resulting in the fused unit, [wont∫i:]. Or could you? – [d]+[j]=[kudzu].
As speech speeds up, sounds are likely to be left out, or elided (elision). This is especially so when clusters of consonants occur. Indeed, some sequences are impossible to articulate naturally without elision. Try Henry the Sixth’s three advisers. Tongue twisters capitalize on these difficulties.
• Vowels in weak syllables are often elided in informal speech. It is unusual to hear the first vowel in such words as police, tomato, and correct, which routinely appear as p’lice, etc.
• Consonants in clusters are commonly simplified. We are unlikely to hear all three consonants articulated at the end of the first word in Acts of Parliament: [æks]is normal. Similarly, we will find next day [neks dei], government [gΛvəmənt], and mashed potatoes [mæ∫ pəteitəuz].
• Whole syllables may be elided, especially when there is a repeated consonant, as in library or particularly: [laibri:], [pətikjili:].
• Some words are especially prone to elision, such as of before consonants (cup o’tea, lots o’people). Other examples include gonna (=going to), wanna (=want to) and the weak forms of auxiliary verbs.
A sound may be introduced between words or syllables to help them run together more smoothly. This phonetic phenomenon is called liaison. The chief example of this in English is the pronunciation of word-final [r]. English speakers pronounce the [r] in such words as clear or mother only when there is a following vowel: we find [kliə] in clear question but [kliər] in clear answer. This is usually called linking r.
Similarly, English speakers regularly link adjacent vowels with an [r] even when there is no r in the spelling, as in India(r) and Pakistan or media(r) interest. Thisintrusive r can attract ferocious criticism from conservative speakers, when they notice it, on the grounds that there is nothing in the spelling to justify its use. It is especially disliked after an open back vowel, as in law(r) and order, flaw(r) in the argument, or draw(r)ing. (It is hardly ever noticed after a schwa vowel, as in the other examples above, and even the most tub-thumping critic will be heard using an intrusive r in such cases). The BBC is one of several institutions which have become so sensitive about public reaction to the usage that it warns its presenters of the risks of liaising.
.png)
.png)
