Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2013 / A study for the effect of the Emphaticness and language and dialect for Voice Onset Time (VOT) in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA)

A study for the effect of the Emphaticness and language and dialect for Voice Onset Time (VOT) in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA)

Paper · 2013 · Sulaiman S. AlDahri

Summary

The paper looks at Voice Onset Time (VOT), the interval between a stop consonant's release and the start of vocal-fold vibration, in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). Earlier studies disagree on where Arabic sits in Lisker and Abramson's typology. Some place it in Group A (long VOT for voiceless stops), some in Group B, and some in neither. Emphatic consonants, which are typical of Semitic languages and hard for non-native and less-educated speakers, have been studied very little. The author built his own recorded database of carrier words with a CV-CV-CV syllable structure. He then measured VOT for two plain/emphatic pairs, /d/ vs /dˤ/ and /t/ vs /tˤ/, and compared the MSA values with published figures for Arabic dialects and other languages. The main finding is that the emphatic stops consistently have VOT below half that of their plain counterparts. VOT values also shift between Arabic varieties. This matters for Arabic speech recognition, synthesis, and accent or dialect identification.

Key points

  • Four MSA stops were analysed: plain /d/ and /t/ against emphatic /dˤ/ and /tˤ/, all embedded in CV-CV-CV carrier words from a self-built database.
  • Emphatic stops show VOT under 50% of the VOT of their non-emphatic partners.
  • The author's earlier work reports that all four stops have positive VOT, even voiced /d/, unlike English, where voiced stops have negative VOT. In MSA, /d/ ranged about 12–22 ms and /t/ about 38–93 ms.
  • Earlier work also found the standard deviation for non-emphatic stops to be roughly three times that of the emphatics. The paper reads this as evidence that emphatics demand more articulatory care.
  • Planned future work includes more male and female speakers, statistical validation, effects of gender and noise, a survey of Saudi dialects, and an MSA stop-recognition system.

Interesting ideas

  • I1. The study compares sounds that differ in exactly one feature (emphatic vs plain), so any measured gap can be attributed to that feature alone.
  • I2. All targets sit inside one fixed carrier frame (CV-CV-CV), which keeps the surrounding context constant and makes the measurements comparable.
  • I3. Spread across repetitions is treated as a signal in its own right: higher or lower variability shows how controlled or difficult a production is.
  • I4. A single cheap, measurable cue (VOT) is proposed as enough to separate dialects, accents, and languages.
  • I5. The paper sets its own numbers against conflicting earlier reports (Group A, Group B, or neither) rather than assuming one source is correct.

For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

  • I1 (learn): Build evaluation sets of minimal sentence pairs differing in one construction, so that a parser or reader error can be traced to that single phenomenon and used as a negative control.
  • I2 (answer): Generate test questions from fixed templates where only one slot changes, so differences in reader accuracy reflect the slot content rather than incidental wording.
  • I3 (learn): Use the variance of witness-parser outputs per construction as a difficulty map, routing high-variance cases to the LLM teacher tiers or repair-rule induction.
  • I4 (tree): Look for a few cheap structural signatures that identify which UD dialect or annotation convention a treebank follows before choosing a conversion path.
  • I5 (world): When compiled knowledge sources disagree on a value, store the competing claims with their provenance instead of collapsing them, so that later answers can explain the conflict.

Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.

 Institutions

🔬King Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyRiyadh · Saudi Arabia7 works · 74 citations

 Fields, topics and concepts

📚 Shelves 7The field of science this work belongs to (OpenAlex fields).Computer Science · 16,667 worksArtificial Intelligence · 16,194 worksArts and Humanities · 16,039 worksLanguage and Linguistics · 15,891 worksPsychology · 1,552 worksExperimental and Cognitive Psychology · 870 worksSignal Processing · 452 works

🧭 Topics 1Research subjects and languages the work is about.Semitic languages · 2,908 works

Cite

Cite as Sulaiman S. AlDahri. 2013. A study for the effect of the Emphaticness and language and dialect for Voice Onset Time (VOT) in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). arXiv:1305.2680.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1305.2680 · arXiv 1305.2680

@misc{aldahri2013study,
  title = {{A study for the effect of the Emphaticness and language and dialect for Voice Onset Time (VOT) in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA)}},
  author = {Sulaiman S. AlDahri},
  year = {2013},
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.1305.2680},
  eprint = {1305.2680},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1305.2680}
}

References

29 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Lisker, L. and Abramson, A. S., (December 1964) “A Crosslanguage Study of Voicing in Initial Stops: Acoustical Measurements”, Word, Volume 20, No. 3,, pp. 384-442. find
  2. Alghamdi,M.,(2006) "Voice Print": Voice Onset Time as a Model. Arab Journal for Security Studies and Training, 21, pp. 42: 89-118 (in Arabic). find
  3. Alghamdi,M., (2004) “Analysis, Synthesis and Perception of Voicing in Arabic”, Al-Toubah Bookshop, Riyadh. find
  4. Abramsont, A. S. and Lisker, L.,( May 1968) “A Cross-language Experiments in identification and Discrimination”, 21-24. find
  5. Jiang, J., Chen, M.and Alwan,A., (, February 2006) ”On the perception of voicing in syllable-initial plosives innoise”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,vol. 119, no. 2. find
  6. O’Shaughnessy, D.,(1981) “A Study of French Vowel and Consonant Durations”, Journal of Phonetics 9, 385-406. ↗
  7. Al-Ani, S., (1970), “Arabic Phonology”, The Hague. find
  8. Mitleb, F., "Voice onset time of Jordanian Arabic stops",(May 4-5 2009) The 3rd International Conference on Arabic Language Processing (CITALA'09), Rabat, Morocco, pp. 133-135. find
  9. Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Caramaza, A. and Preston, M. S., (1977) “A study of voicing in Lebanese Arabic”, Journal of Phonetics 5:1, PP. 35-48. ↗
  10. Flege, J. E., (1979) “Phonetic interference in second language acquisition”, Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington. find
  11. Das,S. and Hansen, J.,( June 9-11 2004) “Detection of voice onset time (VOT) for unvoiced stops (/p/, /t/, /k/) using the Teager energy operator (TEO) for automatic detection of accented English”, Proceedings of the 6th NORDIC Signal Processing Symposium (NORSIG'4), pp. 344 – 347. find
  12. Peterson, G. E., and Lehiste, I., (1960) “Duration of syllable nuclei in English”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 32, PP. 693-703. ↗
  13. Flege, J. E. and Port, R.,(1981) “Cross-language phonetic interference: Arabic to English”, Language and Speech 24, PP. 125-146. ↗
  14. Sulaiman S. AlDahri and Yousef A. Alotaibi, (29-31 Oct. 2010) “ A Crosslanguage survey of VOT values for stops ( /d/, /t/)” ,The 2010 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Intelligent Systems (ICIS 2010), Xiamen, China. find
  15. Sulaiman S. AlDahri, (July 16-18, 2012) “The Effect of Arabic Emphaticness on Voice Time Onset (VOT)”, 2012 International Conference on Audio, Language and Image Processing (ICALIP 2012), Shanghai, China. find
  16. Sulaiman S. AlDahri, (,August 12-15, 2012), “A Study of Voice Onset Time for Modern Standard Arabic and Classical Arabic”, The 2012 IEEE International Conference on Signal Processing, Communications and Computing (ICSPCC 2012), Hong Kong. find
  17. MSN encarta. (2007) “Languages Spoken by More Than 10 Million People”, http://encarta.msn.com/media_701500404/.Languages_Spoken_by_More_ Than_10_Million_People.html, ↗
  18. Alkhouli, M.,(1990) “Alaswaat Alaghawaiyah”, Daar Alfalah, Jordan, (in Arabic). find
  19. Deller, J., Proakis, J. and Hansen, J. H., (1993) “Discrete-Time Processing of Speech Signal”, MacmillAnn. find
  20. Elshafei, M., (1991) “Toward an Arabic Text-to-Speech System”, The Arabian Journal for Scince and Engineering, vol. 16, no. 4B, pp. 565-83. find
  21. Furui, S., (2001) “Digital Speech Processing, Synthesis, and Recognition”, Marcel Dekker. find
  22. Newman, D. L.,”The phonetic status of Arabic within the world’s languages: the uniqueness of the lughat al-daad”, PP. 63-75, 2002. find
  23. AlDahri, S. S., Almanjoomi, M. K., Seddiq, Y. M., Al-Otaibi, S. N. and Alotaibi, Y. A., (July21-23 2010 ) “Is it a Specific Vocal Tract Shape in Order to Pronounce Emphatics?”, The 7th IEEE, IET International Symposium on Communication Systems, Network & Digital Signal Processing (CSNDSP’10), Newcastle, U.K find
  24. House, A. S.,(1961) “On vowel duration in English, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 33, PP. 1174-1178. find
  25. Wavesyrfer tools: http://www.speech.kth.se/wavesurfer/, 2010. ↗
  26. Newman, D. L., ”The phonetic status of Arabic within the world’s languages: the uniqueness of the lughat al-daad”, pp-63-75, 2002. find
  27. Ahmed, M. S., (1984) “An Experimental Investigation of “emphasis” in Sudanese Colloquial Arabic”, unpublished ph. D. thesis, university of Reading. find
  28. Fant, G., “Stops in CV syllables”, 1973, in speech sounds and features, Mit Press. find
  29. Simos, P. and Abromson, A., (2003) “ Differentail brain activation patterns during perception of voice and tone onset time series: a MEG study”, Neurolmage 18, pp. 448-459. find

Updated

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/aldahri-2013-study-effect-emphaticness-language-dialect/