Modifications of the longitudinal axis of the vocal tract can result from at
[{p023end}]
[{fig01insert}] least four different types
of displacement of vocal organs from their neutral position.vq-laver-nasality.htm
John Laver, Reader in the Department of Linguistics,
University of Edinburgh. Cambridge Univ. Press 1980.
First published 1980.
from:
http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/ling/units/sph302/papers/laver_1980_nasal.pdf
download 071029, and
the original book. The original book is no longer available on the market.
Downloaded, edited, set in HTML by U Kyaw Tun, M.S. (I.P.S.T., U.S.A.). Not for sale. Prepared for students of TIL Computing and Language Center, Yangon, MYANMAR.
UKT:
• This chapter should be read with EGG and Voice quality: http://www.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/phonetik/EGG/page6.htm#1 download 071008, which is more up to date. Unfortunately, I have no time to download it and incorporate into my notes. I do hope it will still be online when I could find time. -- UKT071027
• Be prepared to read lengthy complex sentences in this file which I always expect from a British writer. Also, expect to find mistakes made by the unknown typist who must have copied the text out of the original printed book into pdf pages. I have put in paragraph breaks (¶UKT) to make reading easier. The reader is recommended to consult the original book -- which is no longer available on the market: I could only get it for a few days through an interlibrary loan.
• To be able to cite the contents of this paper in research papers, I have included page numbers of the original book within [{...}]. Most of the pix have been redrawn to meet the TIL requirements.
02.
Supralaryngeal settings
02.01. Longitudinal settings
02.01.01. Raised larynx voice
02.01.02. Lowered larynx voice
02.01.03. Labial protrusion
02.01.04. Labiodentalized voice
02.02. Latitudinal settings
02.02.01. Labial settings
02.03. Velopharyngeal settings Nasal voice
Simplified views of nasality:
First simplification /
Second simplification /
Third simplification
Nasalizing chamber other than the
nasal chamber
Adenoidal voice
Acoustic characteristics of nasality
UKT note
• adenoid
• cant
• contoid
• digastric muscle
• faucal pillars
• laryngopharynx
• nose and nasal cavity
• phoniatrist
• pterygoid hamulus •
rima labiorum
• sphincter
Contents of this page
Paper book: p023
The neutral configuration of the supralaryngeal vocal tract was characterized in
the first chapter in the following way:
1. the lips are not protruded
2. the larynx is neither raised nor lowered
3. the supralaryngeal vocal tract is most nearly
in equal cross-section along its full length
4. front oral articulations are performed by the blade of the tongue
5. the root of the tongue is neither advanced nor retracted
6. the faucal pillars do not constrict the vocal tract
7. the pharyngeal constrictor muscles do not constrict the vocal tract
8. the jaw is neither closed nor unduly open
It was also specified that, in the neutral configuration, the velopharyngeal system causes audible nasality only where necessary for linguistic purposes. It will be assumed for the moment that this is equivalent to maintaining velopharyngeal closure throughout speech, except for phonologically nasal or contextually-nasalized segments.
A radiographic diagram of the vocal tract in a neutral setting, based on an X-ray photograph of the author made in the Edinburgh Dental Hospital, is shown in Figure 1. (It may deserve comment that the hyoid bone, though accurately represented, is unusually oblique.)
This neutral configuration can be modified by three different group of settings, which will each be considered in turn. Firstly, modifications of the longitudinal axis of the tract; secondly, modifications of the latitudinal, cross-sectional axis; and thirdly, velopharyngeal modifications.
Modifications of the longitudinal axis of the vocal tract can result from at
[{p023end}]
[{fig01insert}] least four different types
of displacement of vocal organs from their neutral position.
The first two involve vertical displacements of the larynx, and its associated supporting framework, upwards or downwards from its neutral location, giving raised larynx voice and lowered larynx voice respectively.
The key to vertical movements of the larynx is the hyoid bone, from which the larynx is suspended. The hyoid is a 'U'-shaped bone with the open end pointing backwards, itself nearly horizontally suspended above the larynx by a triple sling system of muscles. ¶UKT
The first sling pulls the hyoid upwards and backwards towards the skull and middle pharynx; the [{p024 end}] second sling pulls the hyoid forwards and towards the jaw and the tongue; and the third sling pulls the hyoid downwards towards the larynx (Heffner 1950: 25; Kaplan 1960: 147; Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 363-9). ¶UKT
The hyoid bone is unique in being the only bone in the body which is not
articulated with any other bone, and its muscular tensions of [{fig02insert}]
[{p025end}] the different sling systems having to be appropriately
balanced for the accurate production of almost every single act of the vocal
apparatus, makes the hyoid complex the prime example of mutually-influencing
interaction or different muscular systems in speech.
Fig. 2. is a schematic diagram of the three muscular hyoid slings. There are two chief possibilities of using these slings to raise the larynx from its neutral position. ¶UKT
(The first is to immobilize the hyoid and pull the larynx up towards it.
This is done by using mainly the hyoglossus, geniohyoid [{#8}],
mylohyoid [{#7}] and middle pharyngeal constrictor [{#12}] muscles to
fix the hyoid in position, and pulling the larynx upwards using the laryngeal
muscle connecting the larynx to the hyoid, the thyrohyoid [{#19}] (Kaplan 1960: 147).
The second possibility is to raise both the hyoid and the larynx together. The hyoid can be raised by contracting the geniohyoid, genioglossus, mylohyoid and anterior belly of the digastricus, which act to pull the hyoid upwards and forwards, while simultaneously contracting the stylohyoid, posterior belly of the digastricus, palatopharygeus, and the middle pharyngeal constrictor, which pull the hyoid upwards and backwards (Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 366). The forwards and backwards components of these mechanisms are made to balance each other, giving the overall result of raising the hyoid. The larynx can then be raised in two ways: either by actively contracting the thyrohyoid and shortening the distance between the hyoid and the larynx; or passively by allowing the rising hyoid to carry the larynx up with it by means of the thyrohyoid membrane, whose median section thickens into the median thyrohyoid ligament (Kaplan 1960: 121), which acts as a mechanical link between the thyroid and the hyoid. The thyrohyoid membrane and ligament have been described in this passive action as 'a checkrein to limit the distance separating these structures' (Saunders 1964:76).
Any of these possibilities allows the larynx to be kept in a raised position throughout continuous speech with momentary positional fluctuations caused by the movements of the muscles directly involved in, or passively affected by, the segmental articulation.
There is also the possibility of pharyngeal muscles such as the stylopharyngeus being directly involved in the physiology of raising the larynx (Greene 1964: 48).
Kaplan (1960: 147) comments that the 'elevation of the larynx tends to decrease the length and caliber of the laryngopharynx'. One might also speculate that, because of the muscular interconnections between the [{p026end}] larynx and the other components of the vocal tract, the articulatory activities of the tongue and the jaw also be affected. Sundberg and Nordström (1976) have shown, however, that in vertical shifts of larynx positions up to 1.5 cm, the main resonatory consequence can be explained by the resulting change in the length of the pharynx. Associated local changes of cross-sectional area apparently contribute little to the overall effect on formant frequencies.
The conclusions in the study by Sundberg and Nordström are based on a comparison of spectrographic analysis of two subjects (a phoniatrician and a singer) who were able to control vertical larynx position during speech, with the predictions of a computer model of vocal-formant correlations with vocal-tract length. ¶UKT
The computer predictions for raised larynx voice were as follows: all formant
frequencies tend to rise. The third and fourth formants rise as the larynx
rises; there is a substantial rise of the second formant for close front vowels
{i} 
,
without a comparable rise of the first formant; and both the first and second
formants rise in open vowels {au}
(Sundberg
and Nordström 1976: 38-9; see also Fant 1960:170)
The results from the live subjects agreed closely with these predictions for the first two formants. 'The major trend ... is that the first formant frequency of close front vowels is almost unaffected, whereas the second formant rises considerably when the larynx is raised. Vowels with lower second formant frequency exhibit substantial increase in both the first and the second formants' (Sundberg and Nordström 1976: 37). For the higher formants, the trend (with some complicating counter-tendencies because of the difficulty for subjects of altering larynx height without changing other articulatory factors) was for the third and fourth formant frequencies to tend to rise with larynx height (Sunberg and Nordström 1976: 38).
In the compilation in Table 1 of Nolan's computer-based analysis of my own performance of the settings, the average values for the first three formants in raised larynx voice match the predicted values only in the case of the first formant, and even there not very satisfactorily. The values for the second and third formants show a drop compared with the values for the neutral setting, where a rise was predicted. The analysed pattern is strongly like that for pharyngalized voice, and in fact the recording was of an extreme version of a raised larynx position, where the sustained muscular effort to keep the larynx high may very well have unwittingly resulted in a severely constricted pharynx. In this case credence should be given rather to the Sundberg and Nordström figures. [{p027end}]
There is a tendency for laryngeal elevation to be accompanied by a rise in the fundamental frequency, and most voices produced with a raised larynx seem comparatively higher-pitched. This, however, is not mechanically inevitable, and can be compensated by adjustments of the pitch-control mechanism of the larynx. Since the laryngeal mechanism for achieving higher pitch has as one of its contributors a raising of the larynx (presumably 'because the larynx is braced up to the hyoid bone to withstand the strong pull of the cricothyroid muscle acting to stretch the vocal folds' (Catford 1964: 34)), then to raise the larynx and leave the pitch undisturbed necessarily requires a compensatory adjustment of some sort.
Conversely, it is possible to compensated for a naturally low pitch range, in singing, for example, by raising the larynx as a continuously-held setting. In this way, many would-be tenor singers, whose organic vocal equipment endows them with an optimum natural pitch range slightly lower than that appropriate for a tenor voice, manage nevertheless to achieve a (slightly strained) tenor-pitch range.
Raised larynx voice often sounds to have a particular mode of phonation associated with it. This can be attributed to two factors. ¶UKT.
Firstly, the interaction of anatomically-linked muscle systems in the vocal tract and the larynx allows the supralaryngeal adjustment to perturb the muscular setting of the larynx. Secondly, the acoustic coupling of the resonatory system of the vocal tract and the phonatory mechanism of the larynx source may slightly affect the fine detail of the vibratory pattern of the vocal folds. ¶UKT
At the present stage of research, not enough is known about the details of very small phonatory adjustments of this sort. Only impressionistic auditory labels are available for their description, and comments offered here are speculative.
Auditorily, and with an implication of an empathetically-sensed physiological state, raised larynx voice often sounds rather strained. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 310) offer this physiological explanation:
When, in phonation, [the larynx] is raised, and the thyroid is tilted in the direction of the position used in swallowing, many abnormal patterns of muscular contraction take place. Certain muscles, which in normal phonation need only make movements of fixation, anchoring with their antagonists any of the laryngeal structures, must now make strong contractions. Other muscles, normally not employed, must be brought into play to operate the displace larynx. The whole activity is productive of localized tension.
There is a discussion in Chapter 4, on settings of overall muscular [{p028end}] tension, of the effect of this sort of tension on the auditory and acoustic characteristics of voice quality.
UKT: Four muscles are responsible for lowering the Hyoid : 16. sternohyoid, 17. sternothyroid, 18. omohyoid, 19. thyrohyoid. They known collectively as infrahyoid muscles because they are situated below the hyoid. -- based on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrahyoid_muscles 071120
The larynx can be depressed by the action of the infrahyoid group of muscles, schematically represented in Figure 2. Together with the sternothyroid , which runs from the thyroid, the cartilage shielding the front of the larynx, to the breastbone, the infrahyoid muscles form a third muscular sling system connecting the hyoid to the breastbone (sternohyoid), and to the shoulder blades (omohyoid, which comes horizontally forward from the shoulder blades before travelling upwards to insert on the lower border of the hyoid bone (Kaplan 1960: 150)). Kaplan (p.149) also suggests that the sternothyroid is 'perhaps the most significant in such activity' as depressing the laryx.
Depression of the larynx increases the length of the laryngopharynx, and one acoustic result of this is to lower the frequency ranges of the lower formants (Fant 1960: 64). Lindblom and Sunberg (1971) give some detailed calculations for a vertical drop of larynx position of 1 cm:
[larynx lowering] lowers all formant frequencies, especially those that can be regarded as a back-cavity resonance ...
For most vowels, the effect on F1 keeps close to 5%-6%. For [u]{u} and [ɑ]
{a} weaker. ¶UKT
The effect on F2 in the vowels articulated with a tongue shape similar to that of [i]{o}, and [ɑ]
For all vowels except [u]
On the average, F4 drops by about 5% -- somewhat less for [o]
Summarizing, we may say that F3 is least sensitive to an expansion of the pharynx cavity in the epiglottal region and, in terms of percent, F2 is the most sensitive formant. The absolute formant frequency change is largest for F4. The net effect of the larynx lowering on F3 and F4 is to decrease the frequency distances between them. (Lindblom and Sunberg 1971: 1176)
As an indication of the absolute frequency values that may be involved, we can note that Sunberv and Nordström made long-term-average-spectra of a singer singing the same song twice, once with raised, once with lowered larynx. The values for the first formant fell from 650 Hz to 400 Hz, for the second formant from 1500 Hz to 900 Hz, and for the third [{p029end}] from approximately 3500 Hz to 3000 Hz (Sunberg and Nordström 1976: 38).
In Nolan's computer measurements in Table 1, the values for the three formants are fairly closely in accord with the Lindblom and Sundberg calculations, both in terms of overall averages, and in the three subclasses of vowel types. A spectrogram of a phrase pronounced with a lowered larynx setting is shown in Figure 19.
Together with the lowering of formant ranges, there is a concomitant tendency (again, not inevitably, and which, as in the case of larynx voice, can be compensated for), to lower the fundamental frequency. Fundamental frequency compensation in lowered larynx voice seems uncommon, however, and a lowered fundamental seems to be an almost ubiquitous accompaniment to lowered larynx voice. One explanation for this lowered fundamental lies in the relaxing effect on pitch mechanism of the larynx by the mechanical downwards pull of the infrahyoids.
A lowering of the larynx was said by Passy (1914: 20-1) to be a component of what he called 'sepulchral voice'. Sweet, on the other hand, thought that 'sepulchral tone' was merely the combination of low pitch and an exaggeration of what he assumed to be a typical English tendency towards a 'muffled', 'dull' quality, due to habitual 'slight separation of the jaws and neutral lip position' (Sweet 1890: 72). Sweet had earlier attributed the 'exaggerated dulling' in 'sepulchral tone' to the effect of what he called 'cheek and lip rounding (1877: 97-8), rather than to the neutral lip position referred to in his later work.
Many Austroasiatic languages of the Mon-Khmer family (Vietnamese, Khmer, Muong, Mon, Khasi, Khmu, and Wa) found on mainland Southeast Asia distinguish two voice registers, a breathy, or “sepulchral,” voice (made by relaxing the vocal cords) and a clear voice (made by tensing the vocal cords).
-- http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-388711/Mon-Khmer-languages 071120
If Sweet and Passy were using 'sepulchral' as an impressionistic term to refer to the same sort of quality, and if we concede that a lowered larynx setting is genuinely a component of such a quality, which Sweet's comment (1890: 72) on its characteristic low pitch might support, then perhaps Sweet's earlier comments (1877: 97) on the lip-rounding component are not so unlikely as they may seem at first sight. Passy might have agreed that lip-rounding is also a possible feature of holistically-labelled 'sepulchral voice', but in any case it is striking that lip-rounding, and especially lip protrusion, as a component of many sorts of lip-rounding, have much in common with lowering of the larynx, acoustically, and hence auditorily. In all three cases, lowered larynx, lip-rounding and lip protrusion, the acoustic effect (Fant 1960: 64) is to lower the frequencies of the lower formants (though the effects are not identical, in that in lowered larynx voice it is the lower formants which are [{p030end}] most affected, and in labial protrusion and lip-rounding it is the higher formants which are most changed). The configurational similarity of lowered larynx voice and lip protrusion is particularly interesting, in that they both effectively lengthen the longitudinal axis of the vocal tract.
It may be, then, that the concept of a 'sepulchral voice', for Sweet and Passy, was basically an auditory concept. In seeking an articulatory correlate for the auditory quality, they individually arrived at very different conclusions, but ones which gave acoustically and auditorily somewhat similar results.
As in the case of raised larynx voice, lowered larynx voice seems to have a special phonatory quality associated with it, by virtue of the same principles of interdependence of the muscle systems involved and of possible acoustic interactions in the vocal system.
Auditorily, the effect is of a somewhat breathy voice. Breathy voice is discussed separately in Chapter 3, as an independent phonatory setting, but one feature which may be relevant here is that breathy voice is produced with a marked relaxation of muscular effort, laryngeally. Speculatively, it may be that to enable the infrahyoid muscles to pull the larynx down effectively, the antagonistic suprahyoid muscles are allowed to relax, and that this relaxing mechanism is similarly involved in the production of breathy voice.
Speakers who use lowered larynx voice often seem to adopt a posture with their chin 'tucked in', as it were, together with a slight rotation downwards of the head. One consequence of this is to reduce the angle between the neck and the under surface of the chin, thus facilitating the process of lowering the larynx by minimizing any potentially-antagonistic mechanical stretch on the suprahyoid musculature. Another consequence is to facilitate the lower range of fundamental frequency noted earlier, by not opposing the pitch-lowering effect of infrahyoid contraction on the cricothyroid pitch-control system.
In this third type of longitudinal setting,
voices with labial protrusion increase
the longitudinal axis of the vocal tract.
Link: http://speech.umaryland.edu/Publications/ASA-Fall05-murano.pdf 071121
The physiology of protruding the lips forwards from their neutral position
touching the central incisors is chiefly a function of the obicularis oris
muscle, which acts as an oral sphincter, and is 'composed, primarily, of the
fibers of other muscles -- particularly the incisive, buccinator, caninus, and
trangularis -- that attach into the lips. The orbicularis oris [{p031end}]
fibers blend rather freely at the corners of the mouth and thus form an almost
continuous sphincter' (Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 374).
As well as serving to close the lips and to pull the upper lip down and the lower
lip up, it protrudes the lips, in conjunction particularly with the mentalis
muscle, which runs from the upper part of the front of the lower jaw down down
to the skin at the central point of the chin, and which in contraction can evert
the lower lip, a usual component of lip protrusion (Hardcastle 1976: 116; Kaplan
1960: 274-5; Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 375). See Figure 3 for a schematic
diagram of the muscles involved in labial protrusion. [{fig03insert}]
The action of protruding the lips, which in effect adds a short section section of variable length to the vocal tract, has the acoustic effect of lowering the frequencies of all formants, with the higher formants more affected, as mentioned above (Fant 1960: 64; Lindblom and Sundberg 1971: 1176).
There is usually an interaction between the longitudinal protruded setting and a latitudinal factor if more than the most most moderate degree of labial protrusion takes place. Anything more than slight protrusion [{p032end}] usually involves a certain amount of horizontal constriction of the space between the lips (Sweet's 'inner rounding' (1891: 17)). This latitudinal action tied to protrusion is not a mechanical inevitability, since it is physiologically possible to have substantial protrusion without any such horizontal compression, but protrusion without lip-rounding of this sort seems rare.
Protrusion of the lips is occasionally asymmetrical, in either the vertical or horizontal plane or both, but discussion of such idiosyncratic factors is beyond the scope of this book.
UKT: Labiodentalization and labialization should be compared to {wa.hswè:} formation. -- 071121
Habitual labiodentalization has the effect of slightly shortening the length of the vocal tract, by retracting and raising the lower lip while leaving the upper lip more or less in its neutral setting. Given that the labiodental setting is usually insufficiently constricted to cause local friction, the auditory effect of this type of setting tends to be minimal except on certain segments. The effect is most obvious on the segments articulated nearest to the lips: oral and nasals stops normally made bilabially are made labiodentally, and the dental and alveolar fricatives are subject to a very prominent auditory modification.
UKT: The explanations on following cases are being considered. (* shows there is controversy on pronunciation)
The following basic consonants (made bilabially) and medial are to be considered:
{pa.} --> {pwa.}
{ba.} --> {bwa.}
{ma.} --> {mwa.}
{pra.} --> {prwa.}
{bra.} --> not allowed
{mra.} --> {mhra.}
{mha.} --> {mhwa.}Only one dental-alveolar fricative {þa.} is known, unless, {sa.} and {za.} (which should belong to r2-stops are included):
{þa.} --> {þwa.}
*{sa.} --> {swa.}
*{za.} --> {zwa.}Two dental-alveolar non-stops, non-fricative (?):
{ra.} --> {rwa.}
{la.} --> {lwa.}
*{rha.} [ ʃ ] -->
{rhwa.} [ʃʷ ]
(If [ ʃ ] is represented as{þhya.}, adding a {wa.hswè:} would probably be not allowed.)
({rha.} = [ ʃ ] -- MLC)
{lha.} --> {lhwa.}
Phonetic labiodentalization of this sort must be distinguished from the auditorily similar effect arising from organic causes such as protruding upper front teeth or a short lower jaw.
A labiodental setting is often combined with various types of lip-rounding, both with and without protrusion. When protruded lip-rounding is added to labiodentalization, the lower lip is frequently slightly everted, presenting part of the oral surface of the lip towards the upper front teeth.
The physiology of labiodentalization is particularly complex. The action of retracting the lower lip while raising it is left undiscussed by all the standard sources in the literature. The explanation offered here must be regarded merely as a possibility, therefore.
Three muscles at least seem to be involved, all shown in Figure 6. Kaplan (1960:272) suggests that the orbicularis oris, in conjunction with other muscles, can act to draw the lower lip upwards. This is also stated by Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 373). When protrusion is involved, the mentalis muscle can co-operate with the obicularis oris to evert the lower lip, as described earlier. The third muscle involved is the paired levator anuli oris muscle (also sometimes called the caninus muscle). According [{p033end}] to Zemlin, the levator anguli oris is 'a flat triangular muscle, located above the mouth angle, but deep to the quadratus labii superior ... Its fibers converge as they course towards the angle of the mouth, where some fibers insert. Other fibers cross over to insert into the lower lip. Upon contraction [it] draws the corner of the mouth upwards and also helps to close the mouth by drawing the lower lip upwards' (Zemlin 1964: 239). The acoustic effect of labiodentalization is broadly the same as that of any tendency to constrict the labial aperture -- a lowering of the formant frequencies, with the higher formants more affected. The acoustic effect of a secondary labiodental constriction on front fricatives is very audible: the lower limit of frequency distribution of the fricative noise is lowered for alveolar fricatives and is raised for dental fricatives.
As a secondary articulation modifying linguistic segments, labiodentalization has been reported in a number of languages. Catford summarizes some of these findings as follows:
Labiodentalized alveolar or postalveolar fricatives occur in several African and Caucasian languages, and perhaps elsewhere. In West Africa, Kom and Kutepare reported to have laiodentalized sounds (Ladefoged 1964, 1971) and in the Caucasu, the Fij dialect Lezgin (Meilanova 1964). Tabasaran, some Eastern varieties of Aghul, and Abkhaz all have labiodentalized fricatives and affricates. In Sechuana there is a special type of labiodentalization described in Jones and Plaatje (1916). The Abkhaz and Tabasran labiodentalization is of a somewhat similar type. (Catford 1977: 191)
A labiodentalized setting is often a sequence of the paralinguistic action of smiling.
Latitudinal settings of the supralaryngeal vocal tract involve quasi-permanent tendencies to maintain a particular constrictive (or expansive) effect on the cross-sectional area at some given location along the length of the tract, relative to the cross-sectional area appropriate to the neutral vocal tract.
These latitudinal constrictive and expansive tendencies can be brought about by the action of a number of the vocal organs, and the different settings will be discussed in five groups, according to the organ principally responsible. The five groups relate to the activities of the lips, the tongue, the faucal pillars, the pharynx and the jaw. [{p034end}]
UKT:
• Labiodentalization and labialization is to be compared to {wa.hswè:} formation. -- 071121
• Identification of 8 DJ-Cardinal vowels: 1. /i/ {i}, 2. /e/ {é}, 3. /ɛ/ {èý}, 4. /a/ {a}, 5. /ɑ/ {au}, 6. /ɔ/ ?, 7. /o/ {o}, 8. /u/ {u}. My identification for 5. /ɑ/ {au}, 6. /ɔ/ ?, 7. /o/ {o}, has been disputed by my good friend U Tun Tint of MLC -- since 2005.
A description of habitual muscular settings of the lips in voice quality entails
a discussion of the well-established but somewhat under-differentiated phonetic
concept of labialization. However, a consideration of the concept of
labialization does not exhaust the field of potential settings of the lips, and
it may lead to a clearer exposition, therefore, if we initially approach the
area of labial settings without reference to labialization as such.
The latitudinal muscular adjustments involved in labial settings consist of tendencies to constrict or to expand the space between the lips (the ' rima labiorum'), which will be called here the interlabial space, in two dimensions of the coronal (vertical, side-to-side) plane of the lips, compared with the neutral setting defined earlier. The interlabial space is delimited not by the vermilion border of the outer anatomical edge of the lips, but by the maximum horizontal and vertical dimensions of the aperture through which the airstream can pass. The assumption is made that these horizontal and the vertical dimensions lie on exactly the same coronal plane. This is in fact not quite true -- for example, both in protrusion of the lips, and in lip spreading with the angles of the mouth pulled laterally and backwards, the coronal plane of the maximum vertical dimension of the interlabial space is further forward than the coronal plane of the maximum horizontal dimension (see Lindblom and Sunderg 1971: 1171). Nevertheless, for descriptive convenience the assumption will normally be held to apply.
All possible states of the horizontal and vertical parameters, leaving aside
scalar variations with a parameter, give a total of eight latitudinal settings
which deviate from the neutral:
[{1}] horizontal expansion of the (vertically neutral )
interlabial space;
[{2}] vertical expansion of the (horizontally neutral )
interlabial space;
[{3}] horizontal constriction of the (vertically neutral )
interlabial space;
{[4}] vertical constriction of the (horizontally neutral )
interlabial space;
[{5}] horizontal expansion with vertical expansion ;
[{6}] horizontal constriction with vertical constriction
[{7}] horizontal expansion with vertical constriction ; and
[{8}] horizontal constriction with vertical expansion .
We have already discussed labial protrusion as a longitudinal setting: combining protrusion and the neutral non-protrusion settings of the lips, we have sixteen different types of labial settings. Together with the neutral latitudinal labial setting, with protrusion and non-protrusion, this gives a total of eighteen categories of labial settings available for [{p035end}] [{fig04insert}] potential use in voice quality. All are physiologically possible settings, but some of the eighteen seem to be used very much more frequently than others (which is itself an interesting observation). Figure 4 is a tabulation of the eighteen settings, with an indication of the settings which, as a tentative impression at least, seem most and least common in their occurrence among speakers of English.
Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of the front view of the nine possible latitudinal settings [{neutral + 8}]
A common labial setting deviating from the neutral is the one involving (moderate) horizontal expansion of the interlabial space with a neutral vertical component and non-protrusion, which resembles a fixed, slight grin. If the amount of horizontal expansion is increased, and/or vertical [{p036end}] expansion is added to this setting, the 'fixed grin' is changed to a quasi-permanent 'smile'.
Another common labial setting is horizontal constriction with vertical expansion and protrusion.
A fairly common setting, is horizontal and vertical constriction, a neutral horizontal component and non-protrusion; another is one with horizontal expansion and vertical constriction, with non-protrusion. Another interesting setting is the one with vertical expansion, with a [{p037end}] neutral horizontal component; it is rare to find protruded lips with such a setting.
Perhaps the most identifiable setting, from auditory clues alone, is the 'lip-rounded' type of setting of horizontal constriction and vertical expansion with protrusion.
UKT: What is being referred as above as:
"lip-rounded" with HC+VE+protrusion
What about the following:
is it lip-spreading ?
It is now possible to give some indications of the equivalence between this approach to the three-dimensional description of labial settings and the traditional phonetic terminology developed for the description of lip positions in segmental articulation. The use of terms referring to 'secondary' segmental articulations for the purpose of describing features of voice quality is discussed below in the section on lingual settings, and some translations of orthodox phonetic labels, including 'labialization', can be attempted here. ¶UKT
'Labialization' as a term has been used in such a variety of ways that it is probably safe to suggest that the only articulatory action to which the various usages have any reference in common is horizontal constriction of the interlabial space. The same applies to the term 'lip-rounding'. It is only when the phonetic labels become more specific in their reference that detailed translation is feasible. ¶UKT
Thus the terms 'close rounding' and 'open rounding' can be translated as follows: ¶UKT
'close rounding' is used usually to correspond to horizontal and vertical constriction of the interlabial space, with the degree of protrusion very marked for an articulation such as Cardinal Vowel No.8, for example (see Jones 1962: 33, Fig.22), but less marked for Cardinal Vowel No.7 (ibid. Fig.21).
UKT: Close rounding = HC+VC+protrusion
Is this {u:}?
'Open rounding' would correspond to horizontal constriction and vertical expansion of the interlabial space, with marked protrusion. The vertical expansion gives way to vertical constriction in a progression to 'close rounding'.
UKT: Open rounding = HC+VE+protrusion
The term 'lip spreading' seems to refer uniquely to horizontal expansion of the interlabial space, with no protrusion, although there is a tacit convention that a spread lip position is limited to postrues without much if any vertical expansion of the interlabial space.
UKT: lip spreading = HE+no-protrusion
Sweet was one of the first phoneticians to begin to distinguish between the three dimensions of labial articulation suggested here. In his Handbook of phonetics (1877: 13-14) he distinguishes the different parameters in this way:
firstly, 'Projecting [pouting] the lips ... of course practically lengthens the mouth channel by adding a resonance-chamber beyond the teeth'
secondly, 'inner rounding' is his label for 'lateral compression of the cheek passage'; and
thirdly, he sees 'lip-narrowing as [{p038end}] being the result of constrictive effort in the vertical dimension, whose degree of aperture normally varies with the height of the tongue, 'high vowels having the narrowest, low the widest lip-aperture'.
In his Primer of phonetics (taking quotations from the third edition, in 1906), Sweet makes this classification rather clearer. He continues to speak of 'pouting' (1906: 18) ; he implies that vertical constriction is the most important component of what he now calls 'outer rounding' -- i.e. his previous 'lip-narrowing', in saying ¶UKT
'In outer rounding -- with which front vowels are rounded -- the lips are brought together vertically' (1906: 17); ¶UKT
he then suggests in effect that horizontal constriction is the most important component of his 'inner rounding' ¶UKT
'Back vowels, on the other hand, are rounded by lateral compression of the corners of the mouth, and, apparently of the cheeks as well' (1906: 17)
Another phonetician who explicitly distinguishes between the three labial dimensions is Heffner (1950). He put forward a descriptive scheme for labial articulation in terms not dissimilar to the ones used in this book. He said that, apart from the 'spread lip position', there are
two types of lip rounding.
(a) A long narrow slit is produced between the two lips by bringing the lips vertically nearer each other. 'This is called vertical lip rounding.
(b) A horizontally short, more of less oval opening is produced by closing the lips from the corners towards the center until only a small aperture remains. This is called horizontal lip rounding. (Heffner 1950: 98)
He also noted that ¶UKT
'protrusion of the lips is often a concomitant of horizontal lip rounding. It is much less frequently found with vertical lip rounding' (ibid.). ¶UKT
Like most other writers on phonetics, Heffner pays no attention to the possibility of vertical expansion of the interlabial space, as opposed to its constriction. In fact he quite explicitly excludes factors to do with expansion from the consideration of lip rounding, in saying ¶UKT
'Rounded vowels are produced when the area of the aperture of the mouth cavity is reduced by contraction of the muscles of the lips' (1950: 98). ¶UKT
But if one examines the photographs of Daniels Jones' lip posture in pronouncing the Cardinal Vowels and looks at the overall area of the 'aperture of the mouth cavity' as related to rounded versus spread vowels, then it is precisely the expanded vertical component which gives Cardinal Vowel No. 6, with open rounding, an aperture area scarcely less than that for the unrounded Cardinal Vowel No. 3 (Jones 1962: 33, Fig. 20 and Fig. 17) [{Are #6. /ɔ/ ? , and #3. /ɛ/ {èý} being referred to?}]
UKT:
• Fig.17 for /ɛ/ and Fig.20 for /ɔ/ are from http://www.let.uu.nl/~audiufon/images/lips2.jpg 071123
• The glyph ɔ is known as "open o". The letter looks as a reversed C. The Roman emperor Claudius (reigned 41-54 AD) introduced three letters to the alphabet, one of which is a reversed C (the antisigma)
-- based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudian_letters 071123.
No account is taken here of idiosyncratic asymmetries of latitudinal labial
settings. [{p039end}]
The physiology of manipulation of the interlabial space has been described by a number of writers, and the following comments rely chiefly on the accounts of Fromkin (1965: 93-109), Hardcastle (1976: 111-20), Kaplan (1960- 272-4), and Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 374-5). Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of the action of the labial muscles discussed below. [{fig06insert}]
Horizontal expansion of the interlabial space is achieved principally by contraction of the zygomaticus, risorius and buccinator muscles. The zygomaticus runs from the temporal bone diagonally forward and down and outward; the risorius runs from near the ear across the cheek to the [{p040end}] corner of the mouth as well, and widens the mouth laterally; and the buccinator is the large, strong muscle which makes up most of the cheek wall, coming from the jaw near the ear to the corner of mouth once again, pulling the corner laterally and to some degree backwards.
Vertical expansion of the interlabial space, where this is done by no contribution from lowering the jaw, is almost entirely brought about by two muscles: the levator labii superioris, which runs from three points of origin (the side of the nose near the bridge, the lower edge of the eye-socket, and the edge of the temporal bone) down to the upper lip, pulls the upper lip upwards and slightly laterally; and the depressor labii inferioris, which has its point of origin on the chin just to the side of the point of the chin, and runs up to the skin of the lower lip, contracts to pull the lower lip downwards. (The elevator and the depressor muscles are sometimes called the quadratus muscles.)
Horizontal constriction makes use of the orbicularis oris muscle, whose sphincteric effect was described in the earlier section on labial protrusion.
Vertical constriction also employs sphincteric action of the orbicularis oris, with appropriate antagonistic tension from the muscles specified above for horizontal expansion, and from the levator labii superioris helping to position the upper lip, and the depressor labii inferioris the lower lip.
The acoustic effect of horizontal expansion of the interlabial space, 'lip-spreading', is chiefly to raise the frequencies of the formants (Fant 1957: 19); the broad effect of the settings discussed above as contributing to the various sorts of 'lip-rounding' (depending on the closeness of the rounding) is similar to that of protruding the lips, and to the effect of laiodentalization -- a lowering of the formant frequencies, with the higher formants more affected (Fant 1960: 64; Lindblom and Sundberg 1971: 1176). In Nolan's computer-based results in Table 1, the findings for close rounding are as predicted by Fant, and by Lindblom and Sundberg.
The descriptive scheme has been discussed so far as if it were largely one for accounting the static, postural configurations. The factors suggested as relevant for contributing to the acoustic effect of the settings have been stated only as comparative categories of dimensions relative to the neutral setting without the scalar values attached to the dimensions. In particular, the corss-sectional latitudinal specification of the interlabial space has been discussed only a shape and not as a quantified area. But cross-sectional measurements are relevant to acoustic quality only in [{p041end}] terms of cross-sectional area, and not cross-sectional shape. Difficulties immediately arise from this position, since it seems to follow that if two settings have exactly the same degree of protrusion, and different latitudinal shapes, but exactly the same cross-sectional areas, then the descriptive model would assert that the settings, being of different categorical values are therefore also auditorily different, while acoustic theory would require that the settings should produce exactly the same acoustic effect. Clearly, in such a situation, an acoustically acceptable explanation has to be found, if the descriptive system is not be undercut.
Note to myself -- temporarily stopped. p042 is still not finished.
Contents of this page
PDF version:
p068-092
UKT: The phrase 'velopharyngeal settings' is formal. The informal (and therefore less precise) is 'velic settings' which translated in layman term would be the 'state of the soft palate' which should be compared to the 'state of glottis'.
Because we will be dealing with nasal voice (and denasal voice), it is useful to know a bit about the anatomy of the nose and the nasal cavity. In dealing with the nasal sounds, it is important to remember that the so called "nasal cavity" is made of two separate "tubes" instead of one and the resonance of one is not exactly the same as that of the other.
Apart from the neutral velopharyngeal setting, which will be defined in a moment, there are two settings, giving nasal voice and denasal voice. More has been written on the subject of nasality than about any other aspect of voice quality. It nevertheless remains an area characterized in phonetic writings by misconceptions and vagueness. Part of the vagueness is due to the lack of explicit distinction between some of the terms used to refer to the phenomena of nasality. One quite common term that might suggest itself as referring to a single phenomenon is 'nasal twang'. It is probably fair to say that it is normally restricted to the description of a voice quality setting (Heffner 1950: 31), as opposed, for instance, to nasality which occurs on an individual segment. But 'nasal twang' is not consistently used for any given type of nasality in voice quality. We shall explore some of the different types of nasality in a moment, but given that different types do exist, it is not possible to be sure that 'nasal twang' is not being used for different phenomena by the various writers who use the term, such as Abercrombie (1967), Appaix, Sprecher, Henin and Favot (1963), Berry and Eisenson (1942, 1956), Bullen (1942), Davis (1941), Heffner (1950), Greene (1972), Lushsinger (1968), Meader and Muyskens (1950), Paget (1930), and Sweet (1877, 1890).
Comment about nasality as a feature of voice quality was already being made in writings on phonetics in the eighteenth century, when Bayly (1758: 130) wrote that
The most remarkable ill tones arise from what is called speaking through the nose and in the throat
and Herries (1773: 55), (writing about denasality), referred to
that dull, disagreeable sound, which we call sneveling or "speaking through the nose". The latter term is entirely wrong, because it is the defect of NOT speaking thro' the nose, which occasions that impropriety of articulation.
Webster (1789: 106-9) referred to nasality in these terms
the drawling, nasal manner of speaking in New England ... The great error in their manner of speaking proceeds immediately from not opening the mouth sufficiently. Hence the words are drawled out in a careless lazy manner, or the sound finds passage through the nose. Nothing can be so disagreeable as that drawling, whining cant that distinguishes a certain class of people; and too much pains cannot be taken to reform the practice.
By the first part of the nineteenth century, the label 'nasal', was being used for a quality of the voice, by writers such as Rush (1827) and Willis (1929) without any need for explantation, and by the time Sweet (1877, 1890) and Bell (1908) were writing about voice quality, it was fairly firmly established. Luchsinger and Arnold draw attention to an interesting instance
The old speech pathologists, notably H. Gutzmann, Sr. (1901), Nadoleczny (1929), quoted the examples of habitually nasal speech among Prussian Imperial Guard lieutenants, and the widespread nasality among priests and pastors in the eighteenth century, of whom it was said 'Humilitatis gratis nasalitatem affectant' (For the sake of humility, they affect nasality). (Luchsinger and Arnold 1965: 666)
We can mention in passing that a variety of terms are used for 'nasal voice' and 'denasal voice' in the technical vocabulary of speech pathology, where there is no established single usage. They include not only 'nasality' and 'denasality' (Moore 1957), but also such labels as 'rhinophonia' (Travis 1931); 'rhinolalia' (clausa, aperta, mixta)' (Luchsinger and Arnold (1965); 'hyperrhinophonia', 'hyporhinophonia', 'hyperrhinolalia', 'hyporhinolalia' (Greene 1964); and 'hypernasality' and 'hyponasality' (Van Riper and Irwin 1958).
An alternative to the phrase 'velopharyngeal settings' used here could be 'velic settings', and 'velic setting will be often used as an informal paraphrase throughout this section. 'Velopharyngeal' is preferred to 'velic' in the formal vocabulary of the descriptive system for a good reason, however. That is, there is a good deal more to consider in the physiology of nasality and denasality than just the position of the velum; and it is in keeping with the theme running through the whole of the descriptive model of interdependence of muscle systems in different parts of the vocal apparatus, that 'velopharyngeal' is used as a reflection of the effect of velic activity on the activities of the pharynx (and hence of the tongue and the larynx). We shall see that some of the vagueness and misconceptions about nasality could well be attributed to the oversimplistic view of the velpharyngeal action as involving only the positioning of the velum that is continually repeated in much of the phonetic literature.
The neutral velopharyngeal setting was said earlier to have velopharyngeal closure on all segments except those where audible nasality is critical for their phonological identity in a given language, and on contextually-nasalized segments immediately preceding them. The question arises as to what constitutes the neutral amount of nasalization of this latter, contextual sort. The position will be adopted here that a neutral amount of anticipatory [{p069end}] nasality is that brought about by physiologically-inevitable, general human constraints applying to the temporal integration of the activity of different muscle systems of the vocal tract.
This approach to the definition of the neutral setting has the apparent disadvantage of bringing phonological considerations to bear on what is commonly supposed to be the independent field of general phonetic description; but this might not be the disadvantage that it seems at first sight, because a reasonable case can be argued for the position of that any linguistically-motivated theory of general phonetic must have its foundation in the phonological assumptions of one sort or another. ¶UKT
For the moment, then, the neutral setting of the velum will be taken to be the one where the velum is closed except for fully nasal segments and the minimum possible stretch of preceding articulation. Not enough is known at the moment about unavoidable constraints on the operation of the various muscular systems of the vocal tract to be able to assert that French, for example, characteristically requires more than the minimum amount of anticipatory nasalization, or only the mininal amount, so the definition of the neutral position is here something of a convenient fiction.
It will be understood from the earlier comments about the 'phenomena of
nasality', that the concept of 'nasality' is taken to include a number of
auditorily distinguishable voice qualities, which can reasonably be grouped
together as variations of the single major category
of
a nasal voice. The acoustic criteria by which this can be justified will be set
out after an account of the physiology of the velopharyngeal system and a
discussion of conventional phonetic treatments of the area of nasality.
The physiology of the velopharyngeal system has been the subject of research by many workers, though largely from other disciplines than general phonetics. The facts about the action of the groups of muscles that serve to open and close the velum are reasonably well established, with not many areas of controversy, and the account given here represents the consensus of opinion amongst the summary reports of Greene (1964), Hardcastle (1976), Kaplan (1960), Luchsinger and Arnold (1965), Van Riper and Irwin (1958) and Zemlin (1964).
The mechanism which lowers the velum consists basically of two inverted muscular slings, made up of the palatoglossus and the palatopharyngeus, both of them paired muscles. A schematic diagram of the location and action of the two muscles was given earlier in Figure 9, in the section on faucal settings. This information is included for convenience of reference in Figure 12 which is a combined schematic diagram of the action of the muscle systems which raise and lower the velum.
The palatoglossus is a relatively weak muscle, with sparse muscle fibres. It has its point of origin in the forward part of the body of the soft palate, and curves laterally forward and down to insert into the sides and upper part of the back of the tongue, where its fibres blend with the styloglossus, the transverse lingual muscle and the hyoglossus. The palatoglossus forms the forward arch of the faucal pillars, and was discussed briefly in the earlier section on faucal settings. In contraction, its effect is normally to approximate the sides of the forward faucal arch, and to pull the velum downwards, when the body of the tongue is braced against its tension. When the tongue is not braced, however, palatoglossal contraction tends to pull the body of the tongue slightly upwards and backwards.
The palatopharyngeus, which is a relatively powerful muscle, also has its points of insertion in the body of the soft palate, and curves laterally downward through the side walls of the pharynx, to insert in the back border of the thyroid cartilage of the larynx. The upper part of the muscle forms the back arch of the faucal pillars, and was discussed briefly in the earlier section on faucal settings. Contraction of the palatopharyngeus approximates the sides of the back faucal arch, and pulls the velum downwards, if the larynx is braced by the infrahyoid system. If it is not braced, then the larynx and the lower pharynx tend to be pulled slightly upwards.
The palatoglossus and the palatopharyngeus have been said to combine synergistically to lower the velum, acting as a pair of slings with their directed downwards. A number of researchers have put forward the view that the act of lowering the velum is not merely a passive relaxation of the muscle which lift the velum, allowing the velum to open by gravity alone. Fritzell (1969), and Lubker, Lindqvist and Fritzell (1972), using electromyography and cineradiography, have shown that the palatoglossus in particular is active in pulling the velum downwards. It should be said, however, that not all experimental findings are in accord with this position. Bell-Berti (1973) showed that, on the basis of electromyographic evidence, nasality is not necessarily accompanied in all speakers by active contraction of the palatoglossus. ¶UKT
We are thus obliged to accept that different speakers may achieve auditorily (and perhaps articulatorily) similar results by physiologically different means. This is very likely to be true not only of the velopharyngeal mechanism, but of the entire speech apparatus.
UKT: The above position of J. Laver is important, and merits being quoted in my work. My question is: Does this mean that the way an ethnic English-speaker pronounce /s/ and an ethnic Burmese-speaker pronounce {sa.} can be different, even though the sounds produced are auditorily indistinguishable. Going a step further the English /ʧ/ and Burmese {hkya.} sound are articulated differently even though they sound almost the same.
The action of the palatoglossus, when tensed, affects other settings of the supralaryngeal vocal tract. Diamond (1952) suggests that not only is the palatoglossus inserted into the sides of the back of the tongue, but that some fibres of the palatoglossus itself continue transversely through the body of the tongue to form a sphincter system rather than merely a sling system. Most writers support the sling interpretation of palatoglossal anatomy and physiology, but in either case, sling or sphincter, the articulatory action of the body of the tongue is likely to be slightly constrained when the palatoglossus contracts. ¶UKT
In nasal voice, with the velum mostly held in a lowered position, there often seems to be an auditory component similar to the effect of slight velarization -- that is to the effect of having a lingual setting in which the centre of mass of the tongue is moved slightly radially upwards and backwards. ¶UKT
One explanation for this impression, if it is an accurate auditory judgment, is the muscular linkage between the lowered velum and the tongue. This is supported by a finding by Hixon (1949) that nasal speakers seem to retract and raised their tongues more than normal non-nasal speakers. An alternative or possibly complementary explanation is that the auditory effect labelled here as 'velarization' is the result, acoustically, of constricting the vocal tract at the velar region, and that this may be achieved not only by the movement of the body of the tongue, but also by the downward movement of the soft palate and the inward, coronal movement of the faucal pillars, particularly the palatoglossal arch.
Lowering the velum in nasal voice will have an effect on a number of other types of settings. The palatopharyngeous, connecting the velum and the thyroid cartilage of the larynx, has an influence, when it contracts, on the fine detail of the mode of vibration of the vocal folds in laryngeal settings, both when the larynx is free to be pulled upwards and when the infrahyoid complex resists the upward pull. Nasal voice has been shown to have a special mode of phonation associated with it by Fletcher (1947), who is cited by Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 244) for his high speed cinefilms of the action of the vocal folds in various voice qualities. They report that he found that 'in his subject, the vocal folds opened more abruptly and assumed a different shape in nasal phonation than they did in normal phonation'. Apart from this muscular linkage, the effect of nasality on fine detail of phonation can also be partially ascribed to the changed acoustic coupling between the resonatory system of the tract and the larynx source.
There is another aspect of the interactions of the palatopharyngeous and the larynx. When the larynx is not braced by the infrahyoid musculature, and is pulled slightly upwards, the resulting change of the longitudinal axis of the vocal tract is reflected in changes of the resonatory characteristics, and this would contribute another factor to the change in the source-system acoustic coupling. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 244) give a personal finding that supports this: 'Clinically, we have found many cases of hypernasality who showed a marked elevation of the thyroid on their highly nasalized vowels which did not appear on those less nasalized.' Phonetically, it is easy to test this tendency for the thyroid cartilage to rise slightly during the production of nasality, by lightly resting a finger tip in the central notch in the top of the top of the thyroid while changing an oral vowel to its nasalized counterpart.
The mechanism which acts to raise the soft palate to give velic closure is more complex, and to some degree more controversial. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 388-95) give a very clear account of differences of opinion that exist in this area, and the comments incorporated here of Bloomer, Buck, Calnan, Harrington and Podvinec are found in their outline.
The difficulty in giving a precise account of the velopharyngeal closing mechanism lies partly in the fact that only is its action different in speech from its involvement in the biologically primary function of swallowing, according to Calnan (1954), Bloomer (1953) and Lubker, Fritzell and Lindqvist (1972), but also that the closing action differs between different individuals (Bloomer, 1953; Buck, 1954, and between different sounds in the speech of the same individual (Calnan 1953; Harrington 1944). Another aspect is that not only do the structure and condition of the nasal tract differ organically from person to person, just as the rest of the vocal apparatus does, but the resonatory condition of the nasal tract of any given speaker also changes from day to day, in respect of such details as the consistency of the mucal lining (House 1957). As Van Riper and Irwin point out (1958: 388-9), when factors such as these are coupled with the complicated anatomy of the velopharyngeal system, and its relative inaccessibility to direct observation, broad generalizations about the functioning of the system are difficult to make, and it is not surprising that a certain amount of controversy should still prevail.
Some agreement does exist, however, about the anatomy and physiology of the velopharyngeal system and the mechanism which serve to raise the velum to give velic closure.
There are certainly four muscles involved in raising the velum, and possibly six. The four chief muscles are the palatal tensor, the palatal levator, the superior pharyngeal constrictor, and some fibres of the upper part of the palatopharyngeus. The two other muscles possibly involved are the uvular muscles (the azygos uvulae), and the salpingopharyngeus. The paired palatal tensor has a number of points of attachment on the skull above and to the sides of the soft palate. It is connected vertically downwards to a tendon, which then bends at right angles round the hamular process of the pterygoid (or pterygoid-hamulus) like a rope around a capstan, and continues inwards to insert horizontally into the sides of the soft palate. Contraction of the tensor, as the name suggests, tautens the tendon, which serves to spread and tense the soft palate laterally. It also provides a fixed band within the body of the soft palate to which other palatal muscles are attached.
The paired levator also has its points of origin on the skull, above and behind the soft palate. It passes downwards, forwards and inwards to insert laterally in the back upper surface of the soft palate, forming most of the velic mass. Contraction of the levator lifts the body of the velum, which has been tensed by the tensor. The bending of the soft palate to form a palatal 'knee' may be helped by the contraction of the small uvular muscle, the azygos uvulae, which forms the body of the uvular and serves to shorten it. The levator and the azygos uvulae, together with the tensor, are shown schematically in Figure 12.
One view of the lifting sling action of the levator, together with the other components just mentioned, is that it should not be seen as a totally independent mechanism, but rather as the forward component of a velopharyngeal sphincter slightly tilted from the horizontal. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 391) cite measurements made by Calnan (1953) of this sphincter, giving the transverse diameter (at rest) of about 3 cm and the sagittal diameter of 1 cm or less, so that the opening is oval, flattened from front to back. The back half of the sphincter, in the form of a sling with its concavity directed forwards, is composed of some fibres of the palatopharyngeus, which are said to have fused with the upper part of the superior pharyngeal constrictor. In contraction, these two muscles can pull the back wall of the nasopharynx slightly forward. (The physiological complexity of the velopharyngeal system can be seen in the double function of the palatopharyngeus muscle, which acts both as a palatal depressor (primarily), and as palatal elevator (synergistically).)
Luchsinger and Arnold (1965: 449) emphasize the importance of the sphincteric
view of the closure mechanism [UKT: there is a sudden break in the paragraph of
the pdf file -- not even a period. Does it mean that the person(s) typing the
pdf file had made a mistake here?]
It is to be stressed that the velum does not move like a hinged trap door
-- as is so often claimed in various books. In reality, the palate represents
the anterior portion of the complex velopharyngeal valve, which functions mainly
as a circular sphincter. The actual point of contact between the palate
and the protruding pharynx occurs at the level of the palatal knee ... Beside
palatal elevation, the entire closely interwoven and always synergistically
active musculature of the pharynx is part of palatopharyngeal occlusion.
Not all writers agree, however, on the importance of the contribution of the palatopharyngeus-superior pharyngeal constrictor combination. Kaplan (1960: 207) suggest that 'In the normal person the closure of the nasopharyngeal valve is effected chiefly by the highly movable soft palate, so that the importance of Passavan't cushion is questionable.' Passavant discovered that, in a case of cleft palate, velopharyngeal closure was achieved by the formation of a muscular bar, or cushion, on the back wall of the nasopharynx at the point where it is touched by the lifted velum. This cushion is formed by the contraction of the superior pharyngeal constrictor and the upper fibres from the palatopharyngeus that are fused with it, and which were stated above as pulling the back wall of the nasopharynx slightly forward in closing the velopharyngeal sphincter. Kaplan's position is supported, against that of Luchsinger and Arnold (1965), by a number of writers on the subject of Passavant's cushion, who all deny the importance of the cushion in normal speakers (Bosma 1961); Calnan 1954; Greene 1964). ¶UKT
Greene (1964: 47) cites Russell's (1931) Xray photographs which 'do not show the bulge of Passavant's muscle, or significant forward movement of the posterior pharyngeal wall'. It may be that vigorous contraction of the superior pharyngeal constrictor and palatopharyngeus is a compensatory action in speakers with a short soft palate or a cleft palate, providing a large cushion to make up for velic inadequacies, while normal speakers manage efficient velopharyngeal closure largely by the movement of the velum, as Kaplan suggests, and hence do not need to exploit the potential contribution of the posterior part of the sphincter mechanism. A small bulge of the back wall of the nasopharynx can be seen Figure 1, which is based on an X-ray photograph of the author.
Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 389-91) argue for a compromise position in the sphincter-sling controversy, where they suggest that the sphincteric action is secondary to the primary sling-type action of the levator and tensor muscles. They point out that the amount of lateral contraction of the nasopharyngeal orifice is greater than can be accounted for by sphincteric action, and is probably due to the contraction of the salpingopharyngeus, a paired muscle independent of the sphincter system, which was described in the earlier section on pharyngeal settings. They also cite an observation by Podvinec 91952) that 'the closure of the nasopharyngeal passageway is too rapid in speech to be accomplished by sphinecteric action of large muscles, particularly in view of the large size of the opening', and that 'anatomically, there is no recognizable dilator that would open the sphincteric passgeway quickly or surely with control'.
In thinking about the physiological correlates of nasality, it is probably sensible to adopt the compromise position of Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 391), that the action of the velopharyngeal system is a 'combination of valvular movement on the part of the soft palate and sphincter movement by the superior constrictor and its related fibres'.
It may be useful at this point to note some observations on the speed of velic movement, and characteristic areas of the velopharyngeal opening in different degrees of nasality, made by Björk (1961) using cineradiography and tomography, synchronized with sound spectrography. He found that the velum moves from closure to an open state in 130 msec, and from an open to a closed state in 160 msec. He also established that the rate of velic movement does not vary directly with speech rate, but lags behind: with a speech rate change of 100 to 200 to 300, the rate of velic movement in the same nominal terms was 100 to 130 to 160. The areas of the velopharyngeal opening that he found were 60 mm2 for slight nasality, and 250 mm2 for heavy nasality. So we are discussing a structure that moves fast, over rather small distances.
UKT: I have no idea what the slight and heavy nasalities mean. Translated into the production of nasal consonants, does nasality mean that /t/ is more nasal than /m/ or the other way round? The answer to my question would depend on our understanding or definition of the term nasality.
The outline of the anatomy and physiology of the velopharyngeal system given above is one which, within certain limits, most workers in the study of speech would accept, as a simplified account of a very complex area. Unfortunately, while an understanding of the working of the velopharyngeal system is necessary to an understanding of the phenomena of nasality, it is not enough.
This inadequacy arises from three aspects of the concept of nasality. (¶ UKT)
Firstly, nasality is above all else an auditory concept, and not primarily an articulatory one able to be specified in terms of the position of the velum during speech. This means that the interim articulatory definition of the neutral velopharyngeal setting will have to be modified. (¶ UKT)
Secondly, 'nasality' is a cover term for a number of auditorily similar but not identical phenomena, as noted earlier, and the 'apparent homogenousness of nasality is caused ... by emphathic [UKT: spelling mistake by unknown typist?] reactions of the listener in referring what he hears to the speaker's "nose" ' (West, Ansberry and Carr 1977: 156). West et al. also say, as an extension of this, that sometimes a quality heard as 'nasal' is made 'in such a manner as to exclude the possibility that resonance through or in the nasal chambers plays any part in the production of the "nasal" quality. Indeed, it is unfortunate that the term nasal has been applied to this quality of tone' (West, Ansberry and Carr 1957: 196-7). (¶ UKT)
Thirdly, nasality is a condition of resonance of special kind. West et al. suggest that 'The timbre, or overtone structure, usually given the name nasality is the result of resonance in a cul-de-sac resonator, a chamber [UKT: the term "side chamber" is preferred by J. Laver. See later.] opening off the passageway through which a sound is resonated and delivered to the outer air' (West, Ansberry and Carr 1957: 196-7). They refer to Russell (1931) for the original discussion of cul-de-sac resonance in nasality. Russell (1937), West (1936), and West, Ansberry and Carr (1957) suggest various possible locations for this cul-de-sac resonance, apart from the most usual location, the nasal cavity. We shall return to this cul-de-sac resonance theory in a moment.
As we shall see below, nasality is a complex topic, and one should be cautious about extending explanations of the mechanisms underlying segmental nasality to cover the production of nasality as a setting feature.
Segmental nasality is treated in most textbooks on general phonetics in a somewhat simplified fashion, and the simplifications are not always explicitly acknowledged. Of course, considerations of pedagogic expedience can quite reasonably inhibit writers of introductory texts from embarking on the often complicated explanations necessary to do justice to the detailed realities of nasality. So it may be helpful here to try to give a brief, explicit account of these simplifications, in order to see more clearly how the mechanisms normally put forward to explain the production of segmental nasality may relate to mechanisms responsible for nasality as a setting in voice quality.
UKT: This section break and heading are mine. There was no break on p78 in the section in the pdf file. The following gives three simplified views: to which I have given subsection headings.
The first simplification is the view that when the velum is closed speech is free from nasality, and conversely, that when speech is free from nasality, the velum is closed. For example, Sweet (1877: 7-8) wrote that 'In forming all the non-nasal sounds the uvula is pressed up so as to cover the passage into the nose. If the passage is open the sound becomes nasal.' This view, not unreasonable in Sweet, over a hundred years ago, is still not uncommon. Chomsky and Halle (1968: 316), for instance, write that 'Nasal sounds are produced with a lowered velum which allows the air to escape through the nose: nonnasal sounds are produced with a raised velum so that the air from the lungs can escape only through the mouth.'
It is not for the lack of available research data that this partial, simplistic account of the mechanism of nasality is perpetuated. Even in the late nineteenth century, Rousselot (1901) noticed that the velum is held slightly open throughout most of the course of normal speech without audible nasality. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 239-51), in one of the best reviews of the literature of the difficult area of nasality, say that experimental evidence has been offered 'for the belief that the velum does not completely close off the pharyngeal passage to the nose in normal speech', by Hixon (1949), Kaltenborn (1948), Nusbaun, Foley and Wells (1935) and Wolfe (1942). Later in their book (1958: 392), Van Riper and Irwin also mention Kantner and West (1941), McDonald and Baker (1951) and Heffner (1949 [= 1950]) as resisting the simplification. Berry and Eisenson (1956) also support this view, and further point out that the degree of velic opening is variable. Warren (1964: 161) has shown that velic opening up to a maximum of 10 mm2 is 'adequate for the required oropharyngeal pressure of occlusive ... consonant production'. Kaltenborn (1948) quantified the characteristic sizes of the openings into the mouth and the nose from the pharynx in non-nasal and nasal speakers the typical size of the opening to the nose (presumably on the front to back diameter) for non-nasal speakers was 1 mm, and for the opening to the mouth 11 mm [UKT: the unknown typist had typed "1 i mm" which I presumed to be 11 mm]: the measurements for speakers judged as nasal were 8.8 mm for the opening to the nasal cavity, and 3.1 mm for the opening to the mouth. He is quoted by Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 241) as concluding that 'nasality is caused by having to wide an opening into the nasopharynx in comparison with the opening into the oral cavity'.
The second simplification, commented on by Heffner (1950: 31-2), is that nasal airflow always gives rise to nasality, and conversely that nasality always requires nasal airflow. It is certainly true that airflow can give rise to nasality, but only under certain conditions. If, as we have seen above, the velum may be held slightly open in normal non-nasal speech, then logically it follows that it should be possible to have airflow through the nasal cavity without giving rise to audible nasality. Benson (1951) found 'no relationship between the degree of judged nasality and the amount of nasal airflow in his subjects' (Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 242). Nusbaum, Foley and Wells (1935) assert that 'It is quite possible to utter vowel sounds free from nasality even when air is flowing out of the nose' (Van Riper and Irwin 1958: 243). Thus, clearly, airflow through the nasal cavity is not itself a necessary or sufficient condition for the production of audible nasality. Nasality is essentially a condition of resonance, as asserted above, and the nasal cavity can resonate without the passage of air through it; one has only to think of the possibility of very marked nasality where the nostrils are held tightly closed, for example.
UKT: In Pali-Myanmar in particular and in Burmese-Myanmar, and in the Indic languages, all the consonants can be given a nasal character by the use of {thé:thé:ting}. In English-Latin /ka/ becomes nasals, when /n/ or /m/ is added as a coda consonant, producing the sound of /kan/ and /kam/. If you were to pronounce the coda, you will hear the /n/ or /m/ sound. Burmese-Myanmar has a parallel to this:
{ka} + {na.} + {a.that} -->
{kan} (produced without closing of the mouth at the syllable end)
{ka} + {ma.} + {a.that} -->{kam} (produced with a closing of the mouth at the syllable end)
That is how a Burmese-Myanmar child is taught to differentiate the English <n> and <m>.
What I have referred to above, the use of {thé:thé:ting} has no parallel in English.
{ka} + {thé:thé:ting} -->
{kän}
(Notice how this sound is represented in Romabama: {än}. This is only a way of showing the presence of the nasal sound -- actually no /n/ consonant is added. In calligraphy, this sound is represented by a small circle or a dot above the akshara.)Though we pronounce the three
{kam~ma.} (meaning "fate"). Incidentally,
Considering for a moment exclusively the participation of the nasal cavity in the production of nasality, it is possible to suggest, following Kaltenborn (1948) and Van Riper and Irwin (1958), that a vital factor in inducing resonance in the nasal cavity is the ratio of the latitudinal cross-sections of two openings -- the relatively horizontal opening from the pharynx into the nasal cavity, and the relatively vertical opening from the pharynx into the mouth. We have seen that Kaltenborn's cineradiographic study of velopharyngeal action showed that in non-nasal and nasal voices, there is a major difference in the ration in the two cases: in non-nasal voice, the ratio of the nasal port to the oral port was 1 : 11 [UKT: the unknown typist had typed i : ii], and in the nasal voice was 8.8 : 3.1 (Kaltenborn (1948). We also noted that Björk (1961) found that the cross-sectional area of the nasal port increase from 60 mm2 in slight nasalization to 250 mm2 in heavy nasalization, presumably with a concomitant decrease in the oral port areas. That the oral port is rather smaller in nasal voices than in neutral voices is a conclusion reasonably drawn from the comment reported earlier by Hixon (1949), that nasal speakers retract and raise their tongues more than normal speakers. This was attributed above to the effect of the palatoglossus, which, in pulling the velum downwards also tended to pull the tongue body upwards and backwards. Van Riper and Irwin (1958: 241), commenting on Hixon's finding, suggest that nasality sets in whenever the nasal port is relatively larger than the oral port.
One of the difficulties in achieving any precise quantification of the actual cross-sectional areas involved is that complete confidence in cineradiographic results is not usually possible (Trenschel 1969). This is especially the case with the small distances concerned in velopharyngeal activity, particularly given that one is looking at the outline of tissues lacking the sharper definition of a bony structure. It is also difficult to be sure of the representative nature of radiographic evidence acquired with the help of radio-opaque paint, which makes for an unusual speaking situation. Another technique has recently been introduced into the range of experimental phonetic methods of analysis, however, which can give fairly exact results, if a number of aerodynamic factors are known. This is the use of a hydrokinetic equation to predict the velopharyngeal orifice area from a knowledge of the pressure differential across the orifice, and the rate of airflow through the orifice. Warren (1964) and Warren and Dubois (1964) were the first to apply this, in relation to work on cleft palate speech. They proposed a slight modification to the hydrokinetic equation for use in the investigation of speech: they introduced a correction factor K (= 0.65), for the unsteady, non-uniform and rotational characteristics of airflow in the vocal tract, in the equation
--- Hydrokinetic
equation
where A is the cross-sectional area of the orifice in cm2, V is the rate of airflow through the orifice in cc/sec, P1- P3 is the pressure differential across the orifice in dynes/cm2, and D is the density of air (0.001 gm/cm3).
This approach was tested by Lubker (1969) in an experiment with an actual model, and he reported that 'the area of the orifice can be predicted with considerable accuracy, thus strongly supporting the use of the Hydrokinetic equation for predicting velopharyngeal orifice areas'. Given that airflow and pressure sensing devices can be used which do not interfere seriously with the naturalness of articulation, a more precise and confident quantification is possible of the interaction of aerodynamic and articulatory factors in speech. One important additional factor in the aerodynamic-cum-articulatory study of nasality has to be added to this approach, however. Nasal airflow is 'dependent not only upon the amount of velopharyngeal opening, but also upon the amount of oral constriction' (Lubker and Moll 1965: 271). 'This implies that one measure, such as the velopharyngeal orifice distance, is not sufficient to describe the articulatory factors related to nasal airflow' (Lubker and Moll 1965: 270).
The most important single factor in the production of nasality, then, according to Van Riper and Irwin (1958) and Kaltenborn (1948), is the ratio of the sizes of the posterior oral and nasal openings. The actual dimensions of the openings will naturally vary from speaker to speaker, and the degree of possible nasal airflow without nasality will depend on the anatomical differences between the speakers. Berry and Eisenson (1956) say that in some bass resonant voices, the nasopharynx is open most of the time, without producing audible nasality. It seems statistically reasonable to assume that most men with bass voices are men of larger stature and hence tend to have larger vocal organs. The absolute size of the posterior nasal opening can thus be quite large, and nasal airflow consequently quite copious, before audible nasality begins to be produced.
The third and last simplification often found in introductory phonetic textbooks is that resonance of the nasal cavity is the only resonance responsible for the production of nasality, and conversely that nasality always requires resonance of the nasal cavity.
Some experimental work has been done on the measurement of acoustic energy in the nasal cavity, but the findings are contradictory. Weiss (1954) found a correlation 0.74 between the judged hypernasality of voices in his sample and sound pressure level in the nasal tract. But Shelton, Arndt, Knox, Elbert, Chisum and Youngstrom (1969) claimed that 'measurements of oral and nasal sound pressure level do not correlate highly enough with nasality judgements to serve as indices to nasality'.
We can concede that the resonance of the nasal cavity itself is the most common, and the most important factor to be considered in discussions of the acoustic and articulatory correlates of nasality. There are alternative possibilities, however, and to elucidate these, we return now to the notion of 'cul-de-sac resonance' mentioned above, first put forward by Russell (1931:18). West, Ansberry and Carr (1957: 196-7) give a concise summary and illustration of the notion
The timbre, or overtone structure, usually given the name nasality is the result of resonance in a cul-de-sac resonator, a chamber opening off from the passageway through which a sound is resonated and delivered to the outer air. ... Whenever, along the tube from the larynx to the outer air, there is a side chamber whose only opening is into the main tube, there is a chamber whose only opening is into the main tube, there is a chamber capable of acting as a cul-de-sac resonator and/or producing a quality of tone usually referred to as nasal; and wherever this side chamber has an accessory opening through it to the outer air, it may still function as a cul-de-sac resonator if the necessary opening is smaller than the aperture connecting the side chamber with the main tube.
Amalgamating these comments on resonance produced in a side chamber (to adopt Pike's term (1943: 87) in preference to 'cul-de-sac') with the earlier discussion about areal ratios of the entries into the back of the mouth and the back of the nasal cavity, we begin to approach a reasonable summary specification for the configuration of the vocal tract in the production of nasality, as far as the nasal cavity is involved. ¶UKT
Four cross-sectional areas are concerned: that of the entry to the oral cavity, and that of its exit (that is, the narrowest oral constriction) ; that of the entry to the nasal cavity, at the velopharyngeal orifice, and that of its exit at the nostrils. In producing resonance auditorily acceptable as nasality, the following conditions will apply. ¶UKT
Firstly, either the nasal cavity of the mouth cavity has to constitute a side chamber relative to the other. Whichever cavity has the smaller exit becomes the side chamber, provided that the exit is itself smaller than the entry to that cavity. ¶UKT
Secondly, if Van Riper and Irwin (1958) and Kaltenborn (1948) are right in their comments reported above about the ratios of the areas of the entries to the two cavities, the side chamber will generate audible nasality only when the entry to the side chamber has an area approximately equal to or greater than that of the entry to the other cavity. The nasal cavity is the usual side chamber of the two, in nasal voice, and anatomy facilitates the provision of a large entry area and a small exit area for the cavity. It will be recalled that the value for a typical velopharyngeal opening in heavy nasalization was given by Björk (1961) as 250 mm2. The entry to the oral cavity is made correspondingly smaller, in nasalization, other articulatory factors being equal, by the intrusion of the lowered velum into the back of the cavity, which constrains the oral airflow to pass mostly through the relatively narrow openings of the faucal arches on each side of the pendent uvula. The fixed area of the exit from the nasal cavity into the nostrils is relatively very small compared with the large areas involved in the contribution of the velopharyngeal orifice to the production of nasality.
We can now consider briefly the relation between the production of nasality for purposes of segment performance and its production in voice quality.
In the production of most nasal stop contoids (those with a place of articulation forward of velar), the effective side chamber is the oral cavity inwards of the oral closure. In velar nasal stops, there may be a small side chamber formed by the approximation of the back of the tongue behind the velar contact to the undersurface of the uvula (Hahn, Lomas, Hargis and Vandraegen 1952), but as in uvular nasals, there is normally a lateral space between the two sets of faucal pillars. Also, in velar and in uvular nasals, the surface of the tongue forward of the closure with the soft palate, if touched with a finger tip, can be felt vibrating with any but the very weakest degree of voicing. The surface of the tongue can therefore excite the resonances of the front of the mouth, and the oral cavity forms a resonant chamber in the formation of these two nasal stops. [UKT: Are they {na.} and {ma.}?] The oral cavity is made to resonate here in much the same way that the nasal cavity can be in the voice quality popularly labelled as 'cold in the head voice' when entry to the nasal cavity is blocked by catarrhal mucus in a heavy cold, with the acoustic excitation being transmitted through the tissue of the soft palate itself, or perhaps through the mucal plug.
UKT: In the above paragraph we meet the word "contoid", which for our purpose, we can substitute with "consonant". We have the following basic nasals in Burmese-Myanmar: {nga.} (velar); {Ña.} (palatal); {Na.} (retroflex); {na.} (alveolar); {ma.} (bilabial). However, if you would like you can include medials formed with medial-former {wa.}: {ngwa.}; {Ñwa.}; --; {nwa.}; {mwa.}. And also with medial-former {ha.}: {ngha.}; {Ñha.}; --; {nha.}; {mha.}. These are of the register #1, what the Westerners would call "creaky tones". We can have registers #2 and #3, and so there are quite a number of nasals.
By "nasal stop contoids with POA velar " would mean: {nga.}, {nwa.}, {ngha.} -- all formed from basic {nga.}.
That velar and uvular nasals have oral as well as pharyngeal and nasal cavity resonance can easily be demonstrated by producing either of them with a strong whisper, and changing the position of the lips from a spread posture to a rounded one and back again. The pitch of the resonances of the front of the mouth can be quite clearly heard, falling markedly with increasing lip-rounding and rising again with the progressive lip-spreading.
UKT: The above paragraph suggests a demonstration. Since, the farthest back (into the interior of the mouth) nasal in Burmese-Myanmar is {nga.}, a velar, the demonstration would have to be performed pronouncing {nga.}. This involves the lips in the normal position. For the lip-rounding pronounce {ngwa.}, and for lip-spreading pronounce {ngha.}.
The auditory effect that we perceive as 'nasality', in the case of velar and uvular nasals, is likely also to have part of its acoustic basis in the tuning that the nasal system applies as a resonator neck to the resonant frequency of the pharynx (Fant 1960: 142).
In the production of nasalized segments, as opposed to nasal segments, conventional phonetic description specifies the nasal cavity as the necessary side chamber. The nasal cavity is thus implicated as a normal part of the production of all nasal and nasalized segments. Given that nasality, as a segmental quality, has to be able to be switched on and off rather rapidly, in the spasmodic articulatory fluctuations of continuous speech, it seems certain that conventional phonetic theory is quite right in attributing the control of segmental nasality to the action of the velopharyngeal system (Condax, Acson, Miki and Sakoda 1976).
UKT: This section break and heading are mine. There was no break on p84 in the section in the pdf file. The following gives the presence of chambers, other than nasal cavity, that can produce 'nasality'.
In nasality as a feature of voice quality, however, where the auditory effect has to be nearly permanently present, the involvement of side chambers other than the nasal cavity has to be considered a distinct possibility, in at least a minority of cases. This is all the more plausible in view of the variety of auditory qualities that we are willing to accept as 'nasal', in terms of voice quality.
The possible location of side chambers other than the nasal cavity has been discussed by a number of writers. Van den Berg (1962) says that "Nasality is immediately recognized by the human ear, but the acoustical correlate is difficult to describe exactly ... This might seem unimportant for the phonetician and not for the phoniatrist, but this would be a mistake ... Nasal qualities, at least qualities which are interpreted as being nasal, may arise without participation of the nose, by too large damping factors at other places of the vocal tract, primarily in the vicinity of the larynx ... the clinician needs to be aware of this." (quoted by Greene 1964: 183)
As in this comment, discussion of side chamber resonator locations other than the nasal cavity is very often in work addressed chiefly to workers in speech therapy and pathology. This is to be expected, given that the use of other side chambers than the nasal cavity is more likely in speakers who suffer from some disability in speech such as velic inadequacies of various sorts, and that speech therapists are more likely to meet speakers whose speech is idiosyncratic enough, whatever the cause, to distinguish them from most of the rest of their community, than are workers in other disciplines such as phonetics.
West, Ansberry and Carr (1957), in their book on the rehabilitation of defective speech, mentions various possibilities for the locations of the nasalizing side chamber:
Frequently there comes to the clinic a person whose voice is distinctly 'nasal' in quality but whose vowel sounds are made with the nasal port unmistakably shut tight. Where is the cul-de-sac responsible for his nasality? Many guesses have been made in answer to that question. (West, Ansberry and Carr 1957: 199).
They mention various possible locations, and suggest that the nasal quality usually disappears when overall muscle tension is reduced. They conclude that
It may well be that the contraction of the muscles pulls apart surfaces of the larynx and pharynx, of the epiglottis and tongue, or of the cheek and (external) alveolar ridges, that would otherwise be in contact, thus creating cavities in which 'nasal' quality can be produced. (West, Ansberry and Carr 1957: 200)
The most frequently posited location for the side chamber, other than the nasal cavity, is the pharynx (Eijkman 1926; Paget 1930; Russell 1931; West 1936; Tarneaud 1941; Wise 1948); Tarneaud (1941), for example, talks about nasality caused by tension in the pharyngobuccal cavity, as 'timbre mi-guttural, mi-nasalise' with complete velic closure.
Greene (1964) localizes the possible side chamber in the lower pharynx and upper larynx, saying that
it should not be forgotten that nasality may also be imparted to the voice by muscular constriction in the laryngeal cavity and the relative positions assumed by the ventricular folds, aryepiglottic folds and the epiglottis, also elevation of the larynx by the suprahyoid muscles. (Greene 1964: 184)
The sources of nasality in voice quality suggested by the writers above are rather varied, including as they do hypothesized resonatory contributions from the nasal cavity, the pharynx and the larynx. However, it is not too unreasonable to assume that the comments of all the above writers contain elements of truth, if one takes the position emphasized in this book that the muscular systems of the vocal tract form a unified, complex, interlinked and interacting unit, mechanically, physiologically and acoustically. From the details of the physiology of the velopharyngeal system outline earlier, it seems safe to assume that any adjustment of the system will inevitably affect in varying degrees, many settings elsewhere in the vocal tract. We saw for example that adjustments of the velum entailed changes in laryngeal, pharyngeal, faucal and lingual settings.
Recognizing that 'nasality' is an auditory concept should allow us, ideally, to distinguish between velopharyngeal nasality, as it were, and other types such as pharyngeal 'nasality', faucal 'nasality', laryngeal 'nasality' and so forth. It may be, for instance that the term 'nasal twang' tends to be used for the quality produced by these other sources of 'nasality', rather than for velopharyngeal nasality. Nasality which is not produced by the action of the velopharyngeal system can be separately attributed to settings of the relevant mechanism, when enough becomes known to do this with confidence, and nasality due to velopharyngeal action can be considered independently.
The discussion of side chamber resonance other than that involved in resonance of the nasal cavity is speculative at present, and it gives rise to a problem of descriptive terminology concerning the term 'nasality' and related forms. Should 'nasality' be applied to the whole field of side chamber resonance, or only to resonance of the nasal cavity? West, Ansberry and Carr (1957: 200) opt for the second position, and conclude that 'it would be better to refer to this quality as cul-de-sac resonance rather than nasal resonance' and that 'we are then justified in employing the term nasal to describe the speech of a person who, because of limitation of those in his environment or because of indifference to standards of good speech, utters all his vowels and semivowels with the nasal type of cul-de-sace resonance'. ¶UKT
Leaving aside their prescriptive attitude about 'standards of good speech', they are right about the desirability of having a separate cover term for the variety of phenomena concurrently included under the umbrella of 'nasality': and 'cul-de-sac resonace', or 'side chamber resonance' might be suitable candidates. The only sub-category of side chamber resonance that we currently really know enough about to use with some degree of confidence is resonance of the nasal cavity -- nasal resonance in the strict sense of 'nasal'. Not enough is yet known, in phonetics at least, about the sources of side chamber resonance in locations such as the pharynx, larynx, or faucal pillars to be able to differentiate accurately between the different types on an auditory basis, and until this is possible, it seems premature to develop and over-delicate descriptive terminology.
It is sufficient for the phonetic study of voice quality to note the generality of the concept of a side chamber in producing the effect commonly referred to as nasality, and to retain the well-established labels of conventional phonetics in their technical meanings: 'nasality', 'nasal', 'denasal' and 'nasalization' will now be taken to refer to control of resonance involving the nasal cavity by means of velopharyngeal action, unless there is indication to the contrary.
The neutral velopharyngeal setting was characterized earlier as involving 'velopharyngeal closure throughout, except for phonlogically nasal or contextually-nasalized segments'. This interim description should now be modified. The articulatory notion of necessary velopharyngeal closure for non-nasal segments can be abandoned, since it is clear from the preceding discussion that the actual position of the velum will be highly variable during speech, in response jointly to the type of segment being produced, and to the need to maintain the ratio of the oral and nasal port areas below the critical level which would induce audible nasal resonance.
Condax, Acson, Miki and Sakoda (1976) showed that the velum has five distinct positions during speech, depending on the type of segment being articulated. Extending this finding, and drawing on published experimental work on nasality using endoscopic, fiberoptic, cineradiographic, electromyographic and aerodynamic techniques, Cagliari (1978: 159-66) proposes a very useful 'neutral velic scale', on an articulatory basis. Velic height, he notes, varies from maximally high in blowing to maximally low the respiratory position. Within these limits, different types of speech segments correlate with different velic heights on this scale, in the following progression from highest to lowest: voiceless stops, voiced stops; voiceless fricatives, voiced fricatives; oral close vowels, oral open vowels; nasalized close vowels, nasalized open vowels; nasal segments. ¶UKT
UKT: Neutral velic scale of Cagliari
(velic height high to low):
• stops, vl and vd
• fricatives, vl and vd
• oral vowels, close and open
• nasal vowels, close and open
• nasal segments
-- to be checked further
For the velopharyngeal setting to change from neutral to nasal, Cagliari suggests that at least some segments in the speech of the speaker concerned must show a drop in velic height, compared with the notional values of the neutral scale. Conversely, a denasal quality involves a rise in velic height, compared with the neutral scale. Cagliari also accounts for degrees of nasality by means of his concept of a velic scale:
the severity of the nasal quality in the voice of certain individuals or the degrees of nasalization for linguistic segments will increase proportionally to the displacement of velic positiion for the phonetic segments downwards in the velic scale. The opposite is also true in relation to the process of denasalization. So, according to the explanation suggested, different types of nasal quality may be produced when different individuals with nasalized voice use different scales of velic activity in their speech. (Cagliari 1978: 165)
This concept of a neutral velic scale for segmental performance will be adopted here, and will be taken to underlie the position that the nasal settings of the velophryngeal system include any setting of the velum which produces more audible nasaltiy than is appropriate for the neutral setting. Similarly, denasal settings of the velopharyngeal system will be taken to include any setting of the velum which produce less audible nasality than is appropriate for the neutral setting.
Different degrees of nasality and denasality can be described with scalar labels such as 'slight', 'moderate' and 'extreme'. The general principle of scalar labelling will be discussed in Chapter 5. It is necessary here merely to say that any judgment of scalar degrees has to be made on absolute grounds, not grounds relative to the accent of the speaker's speech community, nor any other relative measure which is not general to all anatomically and physiologically normal human beings.
The denasal setting of the velopharyngeal system is one which minimize the occurrence of audible nasality. One problem here is that the term 'denasal' has been used sometimes to refer to the voice quality of a speaker who has a cold in the head. Luchsinger and Arnold (1965: 684) list as a synonym of 'denasal speech, hyporhinolalia, hyponasality' the label 'head-cold speech'. A speaker who has a cold in the head may well have a blocakage of the nasal port above the velum, and the consequence is that no nasal airflow is possible. We saw earlier, however, that the presence of nasal airflow is by no means an obligatory factor in the production of an auditory quality that listeners are ready to accept as nasality. A posterior nasal blockage of this sort does not necessarily prevent the resonance of the nasal cavity; the cavity may well be acoustically excited by sound waves travelling either through the nasal plug or the tissue of the velum itself, just as earlier it was suggested that the oral cavity could be made to resonate quite audibly by whispering while maintaining a uvular closure and velic opening. If the tongue can demonstrably allow the transmission of the low amplitude sound waves produced by the whisper phonation type, then it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the velum may allow the higher amplitude voiced waves to be transmitted into the nasal cavity. The quality of some (not all) voices of speakers with a head cold gives an impression not of 'denasality' in the strict sense of an absence of nasality, but rather of a special, very highly damped kind of nasality.
The problem of describing the voice quality of speakers with head colds is not, however, the responsibility of this descriptive system, which is explicitly confined to the description of phonetic settings able to be controlled by any speaker of normal anatomy and in reasonable health. It is legitimate to speculate on how healthy speakers go about the business of reproducing a quality of a speaker with a cold in the head, or other obstructions of the nasal port, such as adenoidal swellings, by means of phonetic adjustments of the normal vocal apparatus. This is the situation Abercrombie describes in the Liverpool accent. He suggests that people can be found with adenoidal voice quality who do not have adenoids [UKT: pharyngeal tonsils. See Fig. 994, The Mouth, by Henry Gray (1825–1861), Anatomy of the Human Body, 1918, reproduced in intro-voc.htm] -- they have learnt the quality from the large number of people who do have them, so that they conform to what, for that community, has become the norm. (Continuing velic closure, together with velarization, are the principal components needed for counterfeiting adenoidal voice quality.) (Abercrombie 1967: 94-5)
It was suggested earlier that slight velarization is a frequent concomitant of nasal voice. Abercrombine here indicates velarization as one component in simulated 'adenoidal voice', in association with velic closure. Palatoglossal involvement explains both tendencies. Whenever the palatoglossus contracts, both the velum and the tongue will be pulled towards each other, unless antagonist muscle systems resist the movement. In producing simulated 'adenoidal voice', one is conscious of a degree of tension in the faucal area. Support for the idea that the palatoglossus is actively contracting in producing the voice quality characteristic of Liverpool can be found in the quotation from Knowles (1978: 89) given earlier, in the section on lingual settings. He writes that 'In Scouse, the centre of gravity of the tongue is brought backwards and upwards, the pillars of the fauces are tightened ...' (though he does not mention velic closure explicitly, attributing the 'adenoidal' quality mostly to a combination of the above factors, raised larynx, constricted pharynx and a close jaw position). if it is valid to suggest that an 'adenoidal' effect is achieved partly by palatoglossal contraction with a raised velic position, then there will be a consequent effect on the lingual articulations generally, with a constraining tendency being exercised on the body of the tongue for all susceptible segments.
The physiology of the velopharyngeal system which is relevant to the velum being sufficiently raised to minimize the degree of audible nasality that the neutral velic scale would produce has already been specified in the earlier discussion of the palatal elevator complex.
We come now to a brief discussion of the acoustic characteristics of nasality.
There has been a fair amount of research devoted to this area, mostly as it relates to segmental nasality in nasal contoids and nasal vocoids. The conclusions of the research tend to be rather varied, although there is a measurement of agreement about the principal features. The variability can be partly explained by the multiplicity of physiological components which has just been discussed. Another important source of the variability derives from the anatomical variations between different speakers (Bjuggren and Fant 1964), and to some extent to the variability within the speech of a given speaker on different occasions, noted earlier (House 1957), in details of the consistency of the mucal lining of the nasal cavity, and the underlying tissues. The effect of all these variabilities is that a fairly wide range of acoustic phenomena are perceptually acceptable as indicators of nasality, as will be seen in the summary below of the acoustic characteristics.
Most accounts of the acoustics of nasality assumes a simplified anatomy of the nasal cavity, treating it as a single tube. Fujimura, however, writes that 'In reality, of course, the nasal system at a central point branches into two separate tubes, each of which opens at one of the nostrils. If the system is symmetric with respect to the point at which the sound is measured, this geometrical branching is acoustically immaterial' (Fujimura 1962: 240). In the case of substantial asymmetry of the tubes, Fujimura (loc. cit.) and Bjuggren and Fant (1964: 6) state that additional high frequency nasal formants and anti-formants are introduced.
Fant (1960) gives an account of the anatomy of the nasal cavity which is relevant to a discussion of its acoustic properties. He estimates that the 'overall length of the nasal pathways measured as the shortest distance from the uvula to the outlet at the nostrils' is about 12.5 cm. He continues
The left and right nasal channels run approximately parallel for a distance of about 8 cm. from the nose opening and combine in the nasopharynx. Each of the frontal halves contains a bottom, middle, and upper branch in full communication at any cross-section. These appear to be too closely coupled to function as independent resonators. Provided the left and the right parts show complete symmetry, they will function as a single cavity system. This is the ideal configuration ... but it can be expected that asymmetry will cause an additional diffusion of spectral energy owing to the occurrence of formants from the left and the right pathways, and to the particular mixing in the nasal radiation. A greater damping of resonance in the nasal part than in the oral part of the vocal tract can be expected owing to the greater surface outline in area ratio of any cross-section except in the nasopharynx ... Nostril hairs will also contribute to the damping. (Fant 1960: 140-1)
The acoustic results of adding a nasal tract to an oral tract can be discussed under two headings: the resonatory characteristics of nasal tract, and their effect on those of the rest of the vocal tract.
The most commonly reported nasal formant has a centre-frequency between 200 and 300 Hz (Curtis 1942; Delattre 1954; Fujimura 1962; Hattori, Yamamoto and Fujimura 1956; House and Stevens 1956; Potter, Kopp and Green 1947). Another nasal resonance is reported at about 1000 Hz by House and Stevens (1956), Joos (1948) and Smith (1951), and one at about 2000 Hz by Delattre (1954) and Smith (1951).
The bandwidths of nasal formants are said by House (1957) to be 300 Hz for the lowest formant increasing to 1000 Hz for those near 2500 Hz.
Anti-resonances, or anti-formants, which derive from any shunting side-branch present in the vocal tract (House 1957: 199), are each paired with a nasal resonance (Fant 1960: 60, 149). Values for anti-resonances have been specifically mentioned by Hattori, Yamamoto and Fujimura (1956) as 500 Hz, by Fujimura (1962) as 100 Hz for the lowest he found, and between 900 and 1800 Hz, varying with segmental articulation, by House and Stevens (1956).
The effects on the rest of the vocal tract of coupling the nasal tract to it are reasonably well agreed. The most general effect is an overall loss of power (Dickson 1962; House and Stevens 1956; Kelly 1932). This attenuation is directly due to the introduction of anti-resonances by the side chamber resonator, which absorb acoustic energy, especially in the higher frequencies (Curtis 1942; House and Stevens 1956; House 1957). A reflection of the general attenuation is a broadening of all formant bandwidths (Kelly 1932), which has another consequence, that of flattening spectral peaks in the region betwen 800 and 2300 Hz, giving an intensity plateau (Fujimura 1962). It is almost certainly this general attentuation which is responsible for the drop in intelligibility of nasal voices reported by Diehl and McDonald (1956) and Moser, Dreher and Adler (1955), though Glasgow (1944) attributes the diminished intelligibility to the notion that nasality can call attention to itself, distracting the listener.
Considering more specific indicators of nasality, the most widely reported finding, according to Fant (1960: 149), is a marked drop in intensity of the first formant (Björk 1961; Delattre 1954; Hose and Stevens 1956; Kelly 1932; Smith 1951). Always comparing the characteristics of nasality with the non-nasal equivalent, Björk (1961) found a drop in the intensity of the second formant, although Delattre (1954) disagrees. The third formant shows a drop in both intensity and frequency (Björk 1961; Delattre 1954; Kelly, 1932; Smith 1951). There is a general drop in intensity on all formants above the third.
The characteristic drop in intensity of the first formant is brought about by a number of factors: the low frequency nasal formant boosts the intensity of the low harmonics, below the frequency of the first formant, and another nasal formant at about 1000 Hz reinforces the harmonics just above most values of the first formant. Anti-resonances and an increase in all formant bandwidths then combine to lower the intensity of the first formant ( Fant 1960: 149).
The exact detail of changes in the acoustic spectrum attributable to nasality will depend , as House and Stevens (1956) and Curtis (1970) point out, on the momentary configurational state of the vocal tract, because of the acoustic interdependence of the resonating cavities concerned.
The acoustic characteristics of denasality, to the extent that they derive from velopharyngeal adjustments consist of the minimization on susceptible segments of the acoustic characteristics of nasality just discussed.
Nasality as a setting is exploited linguistically in many languages, as noted in the Introduction. Denasality, in the sense used here, seems to be used in a linguistic connection only as a feature characterizing particular accents, marking membership of sociolinguistic communities such as Liverpool, as mentioned above. Paralinguistically, nasality is used in English in 'whining'. Denasality, as a paralinguistic feature colouring the auditory quality of linguistic segments, is sometimes heard as a signal of incipient laughter.
From: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenoid download 071101
Adenoids (or pharyngeal tonsils, or nasopharyngeal tonsils)
are a mass of
lymphoid tissue situated at the very back of the nose, in the roof of the
nasopharynx, where the nose blends into the mouth.
Normally, in children, they make a soft mound in the roof and
posterior wall of the nasopharynx, just above and behind the uvula.
Function
Adenoids are part of the immune system. Like all lymph tissue, they trap
infectious agents like viruses and bacteria, and they produce antibodies.
Since the adenoids are located at the back of the nasal airway,
they provide defense against inhaled substances.
This function decreases with age as the adenoids shrink. Because
adenoids do ordinarily shrink by late childhood, the problems caused by
enlarged adenoids rarely occur in adults.
Pathology
Enlarged adenoids, or adenoid hypertrophy, can become nearly the size of a ping
pong ball and completely block airflow through the nasal passages.
Even if enlarged adenoids are not substantial enough to physically
block the back of the nose, they can obstruct airflow enough so that breathing
through the nose requires an uncomfortable amount of work, and inhalation occurs
instead through an open mouth.
Adenoids can also obstruct the nasal airway enough to affect the
voice without actually stopping nasal airflow altogether.
Removal of the adenoids
Surgical removal of the adenoids is a procedure called adenoidectomy.
Carried out through the mouth under a general anaesthetic (or less
commonly a topical), adenoidectomy involves the adenoids being curetted,
cauterised, lasered, or otherwise ablated.
Histology
Adenoids, unlike other types of tonsils, have pseudostratified columnar
epithelium.
They also differ from the other tonsil types by lacking
crypts. The adenoids are often removed along with the tonsils. This can
cause a very sore throat for about a week and rather unpleasant breath. Most
people's adenoids are not even in use after a person's third year, but if they
cause problems they must be taken out or they may otherwise shrink.
Go back adenoid-wiki-b
cant 2 n. 1. Monotonous talk filled with
platitudes. 2. Hypocritically pious language. 3. The special
vocabulary peculiar to the members of an underworld group; argot. 4.
Whining speech, such as that used by beggars. 5. The special terminology
understood among the members of a profession, discipline, or class but obscure
to the general population; jargon. See note at dialect . v. intr.
canted canting cants 1. To speak tediously or sententiously; moralize.
2. To speak in argot or jargon. 3. To speak in a whining, pleading
tone. [Anglo-Norman cant song, singing from canter to sing from
Latin cant³re;See kan- in Indo-European Roots.] -- AHTD
[UKT: Do not mistakenly spell "cunt", the vulgar for woman's private
part. AHTD does not list it.]
Go back cant-AHTD-b
UKT: Many years ago (031202) I have posted at
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/2003/3625.htm seeking for information on "contoid
and vocoid". Jim had answered in
http://www.phon.ox.ac.uk/~jcoleman/VSANDCS.htm. The following is an excerpt
from our exchange.
Jim had answered:
There is a difference between vowels and vocoids. ... the contoid/vocoid distinction is similar to but different from the consonant/vowel distinction. These new words were introduced by Pike to overcome the difficultly posed by sounds which fit the phonetic definition of either a vowel or a consonant but don't function as that in speech. According to his definition, the contoid/vocoid distinction is "strictly phonetic and the other based on function". According to Pike "Generally, vowels are syllabic vocoids." The semivowels [j] & [w] are vocoids because they are sounds with "no audible noise produced by constriction in the vocal tract". Semivowels are never syllabic so [j] & [w] are consonants.
Go back contoid-note-b
From: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digastric_muscle 071120
Click on the pix to enlarge.
The digastric muscle (named digastric as it has two bellies) is a small muscle located under the jaw.
It lies below the body of the mandible, and extends, in a curved form, from the mastoid process to the symphysis menti. It belongs to the suprahyoid muscles group.
A broad aponeurotic layer is given off from the tendon of the Digastricus on either side, to be attached to the body and greater cornu of the hyoid bone; this is termed the suprahyoid aponeurosis.
Go back digastric-muscle-wiki-b
From Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_the_fauces download 071029
faucal pillars (pillars of the fauces) can refer to
•
Palatoglossal arch or glossopalatine arch
•
Palatopharyngeal arch or pharyngopalatine arch
The palatoglossal arch (glossopalatine arch, anterior pillar
of fauces) on either side runs downward, lateralward, and forward to the
side of the base of the tongue, and is
formed by the projection of the
Glossopalatinus with its covering
mucous membrane.
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatoglossal_arch download 071029
UKT: In the text, it is stated "The palatoglossus forms the forward arch of the faucal pillars." Click on the figure to enlarge. Note: in the pix, palatoglossus is labeled "Glossopalatine arch".
The palatopharyngeal arch (pharyngopalatine arch, posterior
pillar of fauces) is larger and projects farther toward the middle line than
the anterior; it runs downward, lateralward, and backward to the side of the pharynx, and
is formed by the projection of the
Pharyngopalatinus, covered by
mucous membrane.
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatopharyngeal_arch download 071029
Pix on right: The mouth cavity.
The cheeks have been slit transversely and the tongue pulled forward. (Pharyngopalatine
arch labeled at upper right.)
Go back faucal pillars-wiki-b
From: http://lungdiseases.about.com/od/glossaryofterms/g/pharynx_def.htm 071120
Source: training.seer.cancer.gov
Definition: (aka. Throat) The pharynx, more commonly known as the throat, is the passageway that extends from the base of the skull to the level of the sixth cervical vertebra. The pharynx serves a role in respiration and digestion. The pharynx receives air from the nasal cavity, and food and water from the mouth. The pharynx opens into the larynx and the esophagus.
The pharynx is divided into three regions:
• Nasopharynx
• Oropharynx
• Laryngopharynx
From: Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypopharynx 071120
In human anatomy, the hypopharynx (or laryngopharynx) is the bottom part of the pharynx, and is the part of the throat that connects to the esophagus.
The superior boundary of the hypopharynx is at the level of the hyoid bone.
Go back Laryngopharynx-note-b
From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasal_cavity / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Illu_nose_nasal_cavities.jpg download 071101
The nasal cavity (or nasal fossa) is a large air-filled space above and behind the nose in the middle of the face.
Function
The nasal cavity conditions the air to be received by the areas of the
respiratory tract and nose. Owing to the large surface area provided by the
conchae, the air passing through the nasal cavity is warmed or cooled to within
1 degree of body temperature. In addition, the air is humidified, and dust and
other particulate matter is removed by the fine hairs present in the nostril.
The cilia of the respiratory epithelium move the particulate matter towards the
pharynx where it is swallowed.
Borders
The lateral wall of the nasal cavity is mainly made up by the maxilla, however
there is a deficiency that is compensated by: the perpendicular plate of the
palatine bone, the medial pterygoid plate, the labyrinth of the ethmoid and the
inferior concha. The nasal cavity is enclosed by the nasal bone above. The floor
of the nasal cavity, which forms the roof of the mouth, is made up by the bones
of the hard palate: the horizontal plate of the palatine bone posteriorly and
the palatine process of the maxilla anteriorly. To the front of the nasal cavity
is the nose, while the back is continuous with the pharynx. The paranasal
sinuses are connected to the nasal cavity through small orifices called ostia.
The nasal cavity is divided in two by a vertical fin called the nasal septum. On the sides of the nasal cavity are three horizontal outgrowths called turbinates or conchae (singular "concha"). These turbinates disrupt the airflow, directing air toward the olfactory epithelium on the surface of the turbinates and the septum. The vomeronasal organ is located at the back of the septum and has a role in pheromone detection.
Cilia and mucus along the inside wall of the nasal cavity trap and remove dust and pathogens from the air as it flows through the nasal cavity. The cilia move the mucus down the nasal cavity to the pharynx, where it can be swallowed.
Go back nose-nasal-cav-wiki-b
From Journal of Singing, http://phillyent.com/pdf/whotakescareofvoiceproblems.pdf download 071031
Phoniatrists do not exist in the United States, but they provide voice care in many European countries. The phoniatrist is a physician who is in some ways a hybrid of the laryngologist and speech-language pathologist. Phoniatrists receive medical training in diagnostic and treatment of voice, swallowing and language disorders, including voice therapy; but they do not perform surgery. In countries with phoniatrists, surgery is performed by otolaryngologists. In many cases, the phoniatrist and otolaryngologist collaborate as a team, just as otolaryngologists and speech-language pathologists do in the United States and elsewhere. A physician who has completed training in phoniatry is generally well qualified to diagnose voice disorders and provide nonsurgical medical care, as well as voice therapy.
Go back phoniatrist-note-b
The medial pterygoid plate of the sphenoid curves lateralward at its lower
extremity into a hook-like process, the pterygoid hamulus, around which
the tendon of the Tensor veli palatini glides.
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pterygoid_hamulus download 071030
Go back pterygoid-hamulus-note-b
UKT: 'rima labiorum' is not in AHTD. Searching Google with string "rima labiorum" drew negative result.
Google search for "rima" as a Latin word:
rim- . Latin: crack, chink
rima (s), rimae (pl). 1. A slit or cleft, often an opening
between two symmetrical parts or structures. 2. A
slit or fissure, or narrow elongated opening between two symmetric parts.
rima glottidis. The interval between the true vocal cords.
--
http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1861 071121
Another Google search for "rima" as a Latin word brings up the meaning of
"rille":
"The term was introduced by early telescopic
observers—probably the German astronomer Johann Schröter about 1800—to denote
such lunar features. The word rima (from Latin, “fissure”) is often used for the
same kind of features. Rilles measure
about 1–5 km (0.6–3 miles) wide and as much as several hundred kilometres long."
--
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9063702/rille 071122
Google search for "labio-" brings up
labio-, labi-, labr- . Latin: lip, lips.
--
http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1129/?letter=a&page=1&spage=1&s=labio
071121
Based on above, I understand by "rima labiorum" as "the opening or "fissure" between the lips", and have redrawn Fig.3 showing "rima labiorum".
Go back rima-labiorum-note-b
sphincter n. 1. A ringlike muscle that normally maintains
constriction of a body passage or orifice and that relaxes as required by normal
physiological functioning. [Late Latin sphinctēr
from Greek sphinktēr from sphingein to bind
tight] -- AHTD
Go back sphincter-AHTD-b
End of TIL file
