Hubbry Logo
ApproximantApproximantMain
Open search
Approximant
Community hub
Approximant
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Approximant
Approximant
Approximant
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

This article contains phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA. For the distinction between [ ], / / and ⟨ ⟩, see IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters.

Approximants are speech sounds that involve the articulators approaching each other but not narrowly enough,[1] nor with enough articulatory precision,[2] to create turbulent airflow. Therefore, approximants fall between fricatives, which produce a turbulent airstream, and vowels, which produce no turbulence.[3] This class is composed of sounds like [ɹ] (as in rest) and semivowels like [j] and [w] (as in yes and west, respectively), as well as lateral approximants like [l] (as in less).[4]

Terminology

[edit]

Before Peter Ladefoged coined the term approximant in the 1960s,[5] the terms frictionless continuant and semivowel were used to refer to non-lateral approximants.

In phonology, approximant is also a distinctive feature that encompasses all sonorants except nasals, including vowels, taps, and trills.[6]

Semivowels

[edit]
Main article: Semivowel

Some approximants resemble vowels in acoustic and articulatory properties and the terms semivowel and glide are often used for these non-syllabic vowel-like segments. The correlation between semivowels and vowels is strong enough that cross-language differences between semivowels correspond with the differences between their related vowels.[7]

Vowels and their corresponding semivowels alternate in many languages depending on the phonological environment, or for grammatical reasons, as is the case with Indo-European ablaut. Similarly, languages often avoid configurations where a semivowel precedes its corresponding vowel.[8] A number of phoneticians distinguish between semivowels and approximants by their location in a syllable. Although he uses the terms interchangeably, Montreuil (2004:104) remarks that, for example, the final glides of English par and buy differ from French par ('through') and baille ('tub') in that, in the latter pair, the approximants appear in the syllable coda, whereas, in the former, they appear in the syllable nucleus. This means that opaque (if not minimal) contrasts can occur in languages like Italian (with the i-like sound of piede 'foot', appearing in the nucleus: [ˈpi̯ɛˑde], and that of piano 'plane', appearing in the syllable onset: [ˈpjaˑno])[9] and Spanish (with a near minimal pair being abyecto [aβˈjekto] 'abject' and abierto [aˈβi̯erto] 'opened').[10]

Approximant-vowel correspondences[11][12]
Vowel Corresponding
approximant 		Place of
articulation 		Example
i j** Palatal Spanish amplío ('I extend') vs. amplió ('he extended')
y ɥ Labialized palatal French aigu ('sharp') vs. aiguille ('needle')
ɯ ɰ** Velar Korean 음식 ('food') vs. 의사 ('doctor')
u w Labialized velar Spanish continúo ('I continue') vs. continuó ('he/she/it continued') and ('you continued') used only in the formal treatment of usted.
ɑ ʕ̞ Pharyngeal [example needed]
ɚ ɻ Postalveolar, retroflex* North American English waiter vs. waitress
^* Because of the articulatory complexities of the American English rhotic, there is some variation in its phonetic description. A transcription with the IPA character for an alveolar approximant ([ɹ]) is common, though the sound is more postalveolar. Actual retroflexion may occur as well and both occur as variations of the same sound.[13] However, Catford (1988:161f) makes a distinction between the vowels of American English (which he calls "rhotacized") and vowels with "retroflexion" such as those that appear in Badaga; Trask (1996:310), on the other hand, labels both as r-colored and notes that both have a lowered third formant.[14]
^** Because the vowels [i ɯ] are articulated with spread lips, spreading is implied for their approximant analogues, [j ɰ]. However, these sounds generally have little or no lip-spreading. The fricative letters with a lowering diacritic, ⟨ʝ᫛ ɣ᫛⟩ (formerly ⟨ʝ˕ ɣ˕⟩), may therefore be justified for a neutral articulation between spread [j ɰ] and rounded [ɥ w].[15]

In articulation and often diachronically, palatal approximants correspond to front vowels, velar approximants to back vowels, and labialized approximants to rounded vowels. In American English, the rhotic approximant corresponds to the rhotic vowel. This can create alternations (as shown in the above table).

In addition to alternations, glides can be inserted to the left or the right of their corresponding vowels when they occur next to a hiatus.[16] For example, in Ukrainian, medial /i/ triggers the formation of an inserted [j] that acts as a syllable onset so that when the affix /-ist/ is added to футбол ('football') to make футболіст 'football player', it is pronounced [futbo̞ˈlist], but маоїст ('Maoist'), with the same affix, is pronounced [mao̞ˈjist] with a glide.[17] Dutch for many speakers has a similar process that extends to mid vowels:[18]

  • bioscoop → [bijɔskoːp] ('cinema')
  • zee + en → [zeːjə(n)] ('seas')
  • fluor → [flyɥɔr] ('fluorine')
  • reu + en → [røɥə(n)] ('male dogs')
  • Rwanda → [ruʋandɐ] ('Rwanda')[19]
  • Boaz → [boʋas] ('Boaz')[19]

Similarly, vowels can be inserted next to their corresponding glide in certain phonetic environments. Sievers' law describes this behaviour for Germanic.

Non-high semivowels also occur. In colloquial Nepali speech, a process of glide-formation occurs, where one of two adjacent vowels becomes non-syllabic; the process includes mid vowels so that [dʱo̯a] ('cause to wish') features a non-syllabic mid vowel.[20] Spanish features a similar process and even nonsyllabic /a/ can occur so that ahorita ('right away') is pronounced [a̯o̞ˈɾita].[21] It is not often clear, however, whether such sequences involve a semivowel (a consonant) or a diphthong (a vowel), and in many cases, it may not be a meaningful distinction.

Although many languages have central vowels [ɨ, ʉ], which lie between back/velar [ɯ, u] and front/palatal [i, y], there are few cases of a corresponding approximant [ ȷ̈]. One is in the Korean diphthong [ ȷ̈i] or [ɨ̯i][22] though it is more frequently analyzed as velar (as in the table above), and Mapudungun may be another, with three high vowel sounds, /i/, /u/, /ɨ/ and three corresponding consonants, /j/, and /w/, and a third one is often described as a non-labialized voiced velar fricative; some texts note a correspondence between this approximant and /ɨ/ that is parallel to /j/–/i/ and /w/–/u/. An example is liq /ˈliɣ/ ([ˈliɨ̯]?) ('white').[23] It has been noted that the expected symbols for the approximant correlates of [ɨ], [ʉ] are ⟨ɉ, ɥ̶⟩[24] or ⟨ɉ, w̶⟩.[25]

Approximants versus fricatives

[edit]

In addition to less turbulence, approximants also differ from fricatives in the precision required to produce them.[26] When emphasized, approximants may be slightly fricated (that is, the airstream may become slightly turbulent), which is reminiscent of fricatives. For example, the Spanish word ayuda ('help') features a palatal approximant that is pronounced as a fricative in emphatic speech.[27] Spanish can be analyzed as having a meaningful distinction between fricative, approximant, and intermediate /ʝ ʝ˕ j/.[28] However, such frication is generally slight and intermittent, unlike the strong turbulence of fricative consonants.

For places of articulation further back in the mouth, languages do not contrast voiced fricatives and approximants. Therefore, the IPA allows the symbols for the voiced fricatives to double for the approximants, with or without a lowering diacritic.[citation needed]

Occasionally, the glottal "fricatives" are called approximants, since [h] typically has no more frication than voiceless approximants, but they are often phonations of the glottis without any accompanying manner or place of articulation.

Central approximants

[edit]

Approximants with a dedicated IPA symbol are in bold. Letters shown with the lowered diacritic ⟨˕⟩ are often transcribed without it; the diacritic is used here to distinguish from their fricative counterparts.

Glottal approximants

[edit]

Glottal approximants may be best described as placeless with only laryngeal specification, as they take on the shapes of surrounding sounds in their articulation.[30]

Lateral approximants

[edit]

In lateral approximants, the center of tongue makes solid contact with the roof of the mouth. However, the defining location is the side of the tongue, which only approaches the teeth, allowing free passage of air.

Coarticulated approximants

[edit]

Voiceless approximants

[edit]

There was once some controversy over whether a voiceless approximants could be distinct from a fricative,[31] but recent research distinguishes between "turbulent" and "laminar" airflow in the vocal tract.[32] Ball & Rahilly (1999) state that "the airflow for voiced approximants remains laminar (smooth), and does not become turbulent".[33]

Phonetic characteristics

[edit]

Fricative consonants are generally said to be the result of turbulent airflow at a place of articulation in the vocal tract.[34] However, an audible voiceless sound may be made without this turbulent airflow: Pike (1943) makes a distinction between "local friction" (as in [s] or [z]) and "cavity friction" (as in voiceless vowels like [ḁ] and [ɔ̥]).[35] More recent research distinguishes between "turbulent" and "laminar" airflow in the vocal tract.[36] It is not clear if it is possible to describe voiceless approximants categorically as having laminar airflow (or cavity friction in Pike's terms) as a way of distinguishing them from fricatives. Ball & Rahilly (1999) write that "the airflow for voiced approximants remains laminar (smooth), and does not become turbulent. Voiceless approximants are rare in the languages of the world, but when they do occur the airflow is usually somewhat turbulent."[37] Audible voiceless sounds may also be produced by means of turbulent airflow at the glottis, as in [h]; in such a case, it is possible to articulate an audible voiceless sound without the production of local friction at a supraglottal constriction. Catford (1977) describes such sounds, but classes them as sonorants.[38]

Distinctiveness

[edit]

Voiceless approximants are rarely if ever distinguished phonemically from voiceless fricatives in the sound system of a language. Clark & Yallop (1995) discuss the issue and conclude "In practice, it is difficult to distinguish between a voiceless approximant and a voiceless fricative at the same place of articulation ... there is no evidence that any language in the world makes such a distinction crucial."[39]

Disagreement over use of the term

[edit]

Voiceless approximants are treated as a phonetic category by (among others) Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996), Catford (1977), and Bickford & Floyd (2006). However, the term voiceless approximant is seen by some phoneticians as controversial. It has been pointed out that if approximant is defined as a speech sound that involves the articulators approaching each other but not narrowly enough to create turbulent airflow, then it is difficult to see how a voiceless approximant could be audible.[40] As John C. Wells puts it in his blog, "voiceless approximants are by definition inaudible ... If there's no friction and no voicing, there's nothing to hear."[41] A similar point is made in relation to frictionless continuants by O'Connor (1973): "There are no voiceless frictionless continuants because this would imply silence; the voiceless counterpart of the frictionless continuant is the voiceless fricative."[42] Ohala & Solé (2010) argue that the increased airflow arising from voicelessness alone makes a voiceless continuant a fricative, even if lacking a greater constriction in the oral cavity than a voiced approximant.[43]

Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996) argue that Burmese and Standard Tibetan have voiceless lateral approximants [l̥] and Navajo and Zulu voiceless lateral fricatives [ɬ], but also say that "in other cases it is difficult to decide whether a voiceless lateral should be described as an approximant or a fricative".[44] Asu, Nolan & Schötz (2015) compared voiceless laterals in Estonian Swedish, Icelandic, and Welsh and found that Welsh-speakers consistently used [ɬ], that Icelandic-speakers consistently used [l̥], and that speakers of Estonian Swedish varied in their pronunciation. They conclude that there is "a range of variants within voiceless laterals, rather than a categorical split between lateral fricatives and voiceless approximant laterals".[45]

Occurrence in Western American English

[edit]

Voiceless lateral approximants can occur after voiceless stops as allophone of its voiced counterpart, especially after the voiceless velar plosive /k/, in Western American English.[46]

See also

[edit]
Look up approximant in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Approximant

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In , an is a type of sound in which the active and passive articulators approach each other closely but remain sufficiently apart to allow smooth without producing turbulence or frication. This results in minimal obstruction in the vocal tract, distinguishing approximants from stops, which fully block , and fricatives, which create audible friction through narrower stricture. Approximants are typically voiced in languages like English, though voiceless variants exist in some languages, and they form a subcategory of continuants—sounds with sustained oral —alongside fricatives. Approximants are broadly classified into glides (also called semivowels) and liquids, based on their acoustic and articulatory properties. Glides, such as the labial-velar ** (as in "wet") and the palatal ** (as in "yes"), involve rapid transitions between vowel-like positions and are often considered non-syllabic vowels due to their smooth, vowel-resembling quality. Liquids include central approximants like the alveolar [ɹ] (as in ""), produced with the tongue bunched or curled near the alveolar ridge for central airflow, and lateral approximants like the alveolar ** (as in "let"), where air flows along the sides of the tongue after central blockage. These sounds are common across languages and play key roles in syllable structure, often functioning as semi-vowels or rhotic elements that affect word pronunciation and phonological patterns. In phonological theory, approximants are defined by features such as [+approximant] and [+sonorant], indicating their resonant, vowel-like sonority and lack of significant airflow disruption, which contrasts with obstruents like stops and fricatives. Their articulatory precision allows them to occur in various places of articulation, including bilabial, alveolar, and palatal positions, contributing to the diversity of consonant inventories in world languages.

Definition and Terminology

Definition

In , approximants are a class of sounds produced when the articulators come close together but do not create audible or complete closure in the vocal tract, allowing for smooth and uninterrupted . This results in a relatively open that distinguishes approximants from other like stops or fricatives. Approximants are articulated at various places along the vocal tract, including bilabial, alveolar, palatal, and velar positions, where the active —typically the or —approaches but does not touch the passive . The manner involves a narrow but non-turbulent , enabling the to pass without the hissing or buzzing characteristic of fricatives. Common examples include the labial-velar approximant /w/, as in English "wet," where the lips round and the back of the approaches the velum; the palatal approximant /j/, as in "yet," with the tongue body raised toward the ; the alveolar approximant /ɹ/, as in "," where the tip nears the alveolar ; and the alveolar lateral approximant /l/, as in "let," with airflow directed around the sides of the . In syllable structure, frequently serve as glides in onsets or codas, facilitating transitions between vowels or appearing in clusters to maintain smooth prosodic flow. Semivowels, such as /w/ and /j/, represent a of approximants that exhibit vowel-like qualities when functioning in syllabic positions.

Terminology

The term "approximant" was coined by phonetician Peter Ladefoged in 1964 to denote a class of characterized by a degree of articulatory constriction intermediate between vowels and fricatives, without audible friction. This terminology evolved from earlier designations, such as "frictionless continuants," employed by Daniel Jones in the late 1920s to describe sounds lacking turbulent . In phonetic classification, the term approximant must be distinguished from "glide," which typically emphasizes the transitional, vowel-like movement in syllable onset or coda positions rather than inherent phonetic properties, and from "liquid," a broader phonological category that specifically includes lateral and rhotic sounds within the approximant manner. Approximants encompass both central and lateral subtypes, but these subclassifications do not overlap with the positional focus of glides or the sonority-based grouping of liquids. The International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) standardizes symbolism for approximants, assigning dedicated diacritics and letters such as [ɹ] for the voiced alveolar approximant, for the , and for the voiced alveolar lateral approximant, facilitating precise transcription across languages. Debates persist on the inclusivity of semivowels within the approximant category, with some phoneticians advocating their treatment as a subcategory of approximants due to shared articulatory features, while others maintain they represent high vowels in a consonantal (glide) position, emphasizing phonological function over phonetic similarity. This ambiguity highlights ongoing refinements in phonetic to balance articulatory description and syllabic distribution.

Classification of Approximants

Central Approximants

Central approximants are consonant sounds produced with a central passage of airflow through the vocal tract, where the articulators narrow the channel without generating turbulent noise. These sounds feature a degree of constriction intermediate between vowels and fricatives, allowing smooth airflow while maintaining consonantal status. The articulatory mechanism involves the body or approaching the midline of the vocal tract, with minimal or no lateral spreading of the sides, thereby creating a wide central channel for unobstructed . This contrasts with lateral approximants, in which is channeled along the sides of the past a central contact point. Central approximants occur at several places of articulation, including labio-velar for the /w/, palatal for /j/, postalveolar for the rhotic /ɹ/, velar for /ɰ/, and uvular for /ʁ̞/ in its approximant realization. Phonemic examples include the palatal approximant /j/ in English words like "yes" [jɛs], the labio-velar approximant /w/ in "wet" [wɛt], and the postalveolar rhotic approximant /ɹ/ in "red" [ɹɛd]. The velar approximant /ɰ/ appears as an allophone of /ɡ/ in intervocalic position in Spanish, as in "lago" [ˈlaɰo]. Similarly, the uvular approximant /ʁ̞/ realizes /r/ in , as in "rot" [ʁ̞oːt]. These sounds are prevalent in , where /j/, /w/, and rhotic approximants like /ɹ/ or /ʁ̞/ frequently serve as phonemes or allophones. Pure velar approximants such as /ɰ/, however, are rare as independent phonemes and are mostly attested as contextual variants in specific dialects of like Spanish and .

Lateral Approximants

Lateral approximants are produced when the contacts the midline of the roof of the mouth, typically at the alveolar ridge, allowing to escape freely along the sides of the without audible . This side-channeling of air creates a smooth, resonant sound, distinguishing lateral approximants from other manner classes like stops or fricatives. The most common example is the voiced alveolar lateral approximant /l/, as realized in the English word "light" [laɪt]. In English, this phoneme exhibits allophonic variation: a "clear" , with a relatively neutral tongue body position and the tip contacting the alveolar ridge, appears in syllable onsets (e.g., "lip"); a "dark" [ɫ], velarized with the tongue back raised toward the velum, occurs in syllable codas (e.g., "pill"). This velarization enhances the sound's back resonance, contributing to its darker timbre. Lateral approximants vary across languages in ; for instance, dental realizations occur in some dialects of English and Spanish, where the tip contacts the upper teeth, while retroflex variants like /ɭ/, involving tip curling toward the , appear in (e.g., in words like uɭṭā "upside down"). These variations maintain the core lateral but adjust the resonant qualities based on the contact point. Phonologically, lateral approximants frequently contrast with nasals, as in English /l/ versus /n/ (e.g., distinguishing "lay" from "nay"), and with fricatives in languages possessing lateral fricatives, such as /l/ versus /ɬ/ in Welsh. Velarization of laterals, as seen in English codas, often signals positional allophony, reinforcing syllable structure without altering phonemic identity.

Semivowels

Semivowels represent a subset of approximants characterized by the realization of high s, such as /i/ and /u/, as non-syllabic glides in positions where they function at margins rather than as nuclei. Specifically, the high front /i/ appears as the palatal approximant , while the high back /u/ surfaces as the labial-velar approximant , with their articulation involving a rapid transition from the high position to that of an adjacent . This configuration aligns semivowels closely with central approximants, though they are distinguished by their direct derivation from articulations. Phonetically, semivowels lack an independent quality of their own, instead adopting characteristics heavily influenced by neighboring s to facilitate smooth transitions within the . For instance, in the sequence /ja/, the glide briefly approximates the position for /i/ before shifting toward the following /a/, resulting in a cohesive [ja] without a distinct syllabic peak for the . This dependency ensures minimal constriction, preventing friction while maintaining airflow similar to s, and positions semivowels as glides that bridge vocalic elements rather than standing alone. Examples of semivowels appear prominently across languages, where they occupy onset or coda roles distinct from their full counterparts. In Spanish, the word "yo" ('I') features as an onset glide before the , forming [jo] and contrasting with the syllabic /i/ in words like "si" ('yes'). Similarly, in French, "oui" ('yes') includes the semivowel in onset position before , yielding [wi] as a single , unlike the nuclear /u/ in "tu" ('you'). These instances highlight how semivowels enable diphthong-like structures without forming independent s. Theoretical debates in center on whether semivowels constitute true or simply positional variants of high vowels, with the gliding theory positing that they arise as non-syllabic realizations of /i/ and /u/ when marginalized in syllable structure. Proponents of the consonant view emphasize their consonantal distribution and feature specifications, such as [+consonantal] in some frameworks, while others argue for underlying vocalic identity, treating alternations like /i/ ~ as allophonic processes driven by constraints. This tension underscores ongoing discussions about the featural and structural unity between vowels and their glide counterparts.

Articulation and Comparison

Approximants versus Fricatives

Approximants and fricatives represent two distinct categories of continuant consonants, both involving continuous through the vocal tract but differing fundamentally in the . Approximants are produced by bringing the articulators into close approximation without generating turbulent , resulting in a smooth, resonant sound akin to that of vowels but with greater consonantal . In contrast, fricatives arise from a narrower that forces air through a small passage, creating audible and . This key difference in —smooth in approximants versus turbulent in fricatives—underlies their phonological classification as sonorants and obstruents, respectively. The articulatory contrast between approximants and centers on the degree of in the vocal tract. In approximants, the articulators are positioned closer than for vowels but sufficiently wide to avoid , allowing laminar ; central approximants, such as the palatal /j/, exemplify this with a broad between the body and the . , however, feature a tighter stricture that induces aerodynamic , as seen in the palatal fricative /ç/, where the approaches the palate more closely, producing hissing noise. This gradient of highlights how subtle variations in articulatory precision distinguish the two, with approximants maintaining a passage wide enough for unobstructed . Acoustically, approximants display smooth formant transitions without noise bursts, resembling vowels in their resonant quality due to the absence of turbulence; spectrograms of approximants like /j/ reveal clear, vowel-like formants with gradual changes. Fricatives, by comparison, exhibit high-frequency frication characterized by dense, random striations on spectrograms, lacking distinct formants and instead showing aperiodic energy concentrated in higher frequencies. These acoustic profiles—resonant transitions for approximants versus noisy frication for fricatives—facilitate perceptual differentiation in . Phonologically, approximants frequently alternate with vowels, particularly high vowels, in processes like glide formation or , reflecting their status and shared sonority. Fricatives, on the other hand, often alternate with stops in patterns, such as spirantization where intervocalic stops weaken to fricatives (e.g., /p/ to /f/ in certain ). These alternations underscore the roles of approximants in vowel-consonant interfaces and fricatives in weakening hierarchies of consonantal strength.

Coarticulated Approximants

Coarticulated approximants are produced when a primary approximant articulation is combined with an additional secondary gesture, such as lip rounding or tongue body adjustment, resulting in a simultaneous narrowing at another point in the vocal tract without producing friction. This secondary articulation is typically weaker than the primary one and often involves an approximant-like quality, enhancing the consonant's integration with adjacent vowels or in clusters. Common types include , where lip protrusion accompanies the primary approximation, as seen in the inherent labial-velar approximant /w/, which rounds the lips during velar contact. Palatalization adds a front raise, producing sounds like the palatalized lateral /lʲ/ in such as Russian, where it contrasts with non-palatalized variants before front vowels. involves back raising toward the velum, exemplified by the "dark" /ɫ/ in English, particularly in syllable-coda positions like the /l/ in "feel," which gives it a retracted quality. These can apply to both central and lateral approximants, modifying their base articulation. Phonetically, these secondary gestures alter the structure of the approximant, shifting lower s downward for or and raising them for palatalization, which affects the sound's perceptual quality and coarticulatory spread in sequences. They frequently appear in clusters, such as English /tw/ realized as [t^w], where the approximant /w/ labializes the preceding stop but maintains its approximant nature. In like Abkhaz and Kabardian, coarticulated are prevalent in complex clusters, often involving or palatalization to distinguish phonemes within their expansive inventories (Abkhaz with 58 consonants and Kabardian with 48 consonants).

Special Varieties

Voiceless Approximants

Voiceless approximants are produced through the same articulatory configurations as their voiced counterparts, such as a close but non-obstructing of the articulators, but without vibration of the vocal folds, resulting in equal air pressure above and below the often accompanied by a spread glottal . They frequently arise as allophones through devoicing in clusters, particularly following voiceless obstruents, as seen in the partial or full devoicing of /w/ to [w̥] in English words like "twin" [tw̥ɪn]. A key phonetic challenge for voiceless approximants is their tendency to develop frication due to aspiration or increased airflow turbulence, which can shift their realization toward fricatives; for instance, the voiceless counterpart of /w/, transcribed as [ʍ], often exhibits frictional noise in languages where it occurs. This fricativization is exacerbated in environments with high aspiration, making the sounds perceptually ambiguous between approximant and fricative manners. Voiceless approximants are rare as contrastive phonemes, appearing in fewer than 5% of the world's languages, and are more commonly attested as predictable allophones of voiced approximants in devoicing contexts. There is ongoing among phoneticians regarding the of these sounds: if significant arises, some argue they should be categorized as voiceless fricatives based on acoustic properties like intensity and duration, while others retain the approximant label to emphasize the underlying articulatory and lack of full . Acoustic analyses reveal a gradient continuum rather than a categorical boundary, with variability influenced by language-specific and dialectal factors. Beyond English, voiceless approximants occur in dialects as allophones, notably the devoiced [ɹ̥] following voiceless stops, as in "try" [t̪ʰɹ̥aɪ]. They are also documented in , where phonemic voiceless approximants like [l̥] and [w̥] have developed historically from high register tones or consonant clusters in Burmese and Tibetan.

Nasalized Approximants

Nasalized approximants are characterized by a lowered velum that permits nasal during the production of an approximant, combining the open oral tract configuration of approximants with nasal . This articulatory feature occurs without complete oral closure, distinguishing them from nasal stops, and is particularly compatible with sonorants like glides and liquids due to their minimal obstruction. For instance, the nasalized lateral approximant is represented as [l̃], where the contacts the alveolar laterally while air escapes nasally. In , nasalization of the lateral approximant /l/ appears as an in pre-nasal contexts, such as in "" realized as [fɪl̃m], where coarticulation with the following nasal /m/ influences the approximant. Phonemically, nasalized approximants are rarer but occur in certain like , where they function as distinct segments in nasal harmony systems, often triggered by adjacent nasal vowels or consonants. Acoustically, nasalized approximants exhibit nasal formants, including a lowered first (F1) around 250-300 Hz due to the added resonance, alongside reduced overall intensity from energy absorption by nasal membranes. This contrasts with nasal stops through the absence of a complete closure, resulting in smoother transitions and no burst release, though the nasal murmur persists. Phonologically, nasalized approximants frequently arise in environments adjacent to nasal vowels or consonants, serving as targets in nasal spreading or rules, but they rarely constitute independent phonemes, instead appearing as conditioned variants to enhance perceptual compatibility in sonorant sequences.

References

  1. https://alic.sites.unlv.edu/chapter-11-4-consonants/
  2. https://pressbooks.nvcc.edu/eng200h5p/chapter/3-4-describing-consonants-manner/
  3. https://alic.sites.unlv.edu/chapter-11-10-phonological-features/
  4. https://wac.colostate.edu/docs/books/sound/chapter4.pdf
  5. https://open.maricopa.edu/essentialsoflinguistics/chapter/2-7-classifying-consonants/
  6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231180567_Problems_in_the_classification_of_approximants
  7. https://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/speech.bme.ogi.edu/tutordemos/SpectrogramReading/cse551html/cse551/node38.html
  8. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-international-phonetic-association/article/symbolization-of-central-approximants-in-the-ipa/662591922A5C866BB0A9DE6A7EDA625B
  9. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/3-4-describing-consonants-manner/
  10. https://sharifling.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2_phonetics.pdf
  11. https://www.paultenchdocs.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/IPP-June-11-DM-rev.pdf
  12. https://www.unige.ch/fapse/logopedie/download_file/view/12/237
  13. https://www.kul.pl/files/30/Phonologia/Revision_of_phonetics.pdf
  14. https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/9781487528867
  15. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2013/ling520/LectureNotes2.html
  16. https://wstyler.ucsd.edu/talks/l101_6_phonology1_handout.html
  17. https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/YuanLibermanLvariation2011.pdf
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27685668_The_phonetics_and_phonology_of_retroflexes
  19. https://julietteblevins.ws.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/04/blevins-lateral-feature-geometry-1994.pdf
  20. https://ocw.uci.edu/upload/files/vowels.pdf
  21. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/76153/2/Combs_1984_r.pdf
  22. http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/phonetics.html
  23. https://www.berlitz.com/blog/spanish-vowels-dipthongs
  24. https://www.laits.utexas.edu/fi/html/pho/07.html
  25. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384107001763
  26. https://works.swarthmore.edu/context/fac-linguistics/article/1057/viewcontent/Phonetics.pdf
  27. https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/phonlab/documents/2008/turbulence%2520pdf%25208%2520aug%252008.pdf
  28. https://www.utdallas.edu/~assmann/hcs6367/lec3.pdf
  29. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstreams/adbbee86-358f-44fe-a954-2393176a615f/download
  30. https://community.wvu.edu/~jokatz/LenitionNonAnon.pdf
  31. https://www.phon.ox.ac.uk/~jcoleman/MULTART_unicode.html
  32. https://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~krussll/phonetics/ipa/multiple-articulations.html
  33. https://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/record/2001714/files/A35572.pdf
  34. https://americanphonetics.ruhosting.nl/course/12-sonorants/12-3-1approximants-l/
  35. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781474411776-009/html
  36. https://gbegus.github.io/assets/pdf/BegusCaucasian.pdf
  37. https://accentnetwork.com/abkhaz/
  38. http://science.org.ge/bnas/t17-n1/20_Shengelia_Linguistics.pdf
  39. https://julietteblevins.ws.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/04/VLSonHiermsrev-1.pdf
  40. https://linguistics.ucla.edu/people/hayes/103/Allophones2/AllophonesOfAmericanEnglish.pdf
  41. https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS2015/Papers/ICPHS0077.pdf
  42. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/38466/PDF/1/play/
  43. http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~jkirby/hanoi/slides/lecture15-hanoi-4up.pdf
  44. https://www.phonetik.uni-muenchen.de/~hoole/kurse/akustikfort/nasalacousticsnotes.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.