Skip to main content

All Depressors are Not Alike: A Comparison of Shanghai Chinese and Zulu

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prosodic Categories: Production, Perception and Comprehension

Part of the book series: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory ((SNLT))

Abstract

Shanghai Chinese and Nguni Bantu languages (including Zulu) are both tone languages, and both have a set of phonetically voiceless consonants which have a pitch lowering effect on the tone of a following vowel. In a recent paper, Jessen and Roux (2002) propose that depressor consonants in these two languages can be characterized by the same [slack voice] feature, implemented in a parallel fashion in the two languages, and with f0 lowering compensating in both languages for absence of phonetic voicing. This paper investigates their claims in some detail by comparing production studies of the effect of depressors on tone in Shanghai Chinese and in Zulu and by comparing the tone systems of the two languages. The production studies show that the phonetic implementation of the depressor effect is, in fact, quite different in the two languages. There is also no basis for claiming that f0 lowering compensates for lack of voicing. The comparison of the tone systems shows that the differences in phonetic implementation of the depressor effect follows from differences in their tonal phonologies. In the spirit of Kingston and Diehl (1994), [slack voice] can then be considered appropriate for both languages in spite of differences in phonetic implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See work like Schadeberg (2003) for discussion of the morphological structure of the Bantu verb stem.

  2. 2.

    The complete word list analyzed for the Zulu study reported on here is found in Appendix 1. We thank our colleague, Leston Buell, a Zulu specialist (Buell 2005), for his help in constructing the Zulu word list. The Zulu words in this chapter are cited in the orthography, except that penult stress (vowel lengthening) is indicated and accents indicate High tone (Low tone is not marked). See Appendix 2 for a complete list of Zulu consonants with their phonetic description. See Section. 4.2, below, for a sketch of the Zulu tone system.

  3. 3.

    In the No Focus condition, the target words were produced as old information, elicited with a WH-question on a constituent after the target word, later in the sentence.

  4. 4.

    In word-initial position, the voiceless depressor can only occur with low register Rising tones. In other words, the f0 lowering effect has been phonologized.

  5. 5.

    Chen (2007, submitted) observes that in the No Focus context, the depressor lowering effect is much less salient. See Section 4.1, below, for more detailed discussion of how tone sandhi processes interact with the phonetic aspects of tone realization described here.

  6. 6.

    Confusingly, Jessen & Roux (2002) refer to the depressors as ‘voiced’ throughout their paper, in contradiction to their finding that, in all possible contexts, they are phonetically not voiced.

  7. 7.

    See Downing (2009) for a detailed review of phonetic studies of Nguni depressor consonants. While work like Bradshaw (1999) and Clements (2003) suggests that Nguni depressor stops were historically voiced, Schadeberg’s (2009) detailed discussion of the historical source of these consonants demonstrates that there is no empirical basis for this claim.

  8. 8.

    See, too, Clements & Khatiwada (2007), which suggests that breathy voice is an expected cross-linguistic correlate of pitch lowering on a vowel following a phonetically voiceless consonant.

  9. 9.

    Confusingly, Jessen & Roux (2002) make contradictory proposals about how similar the phonetic implementation of a phonological feature must be in different languages. On the one hand, they point to parallels in the phonetic implementation of [slack voice] in Xhosa and Shanghai Chinese to motivate the choice of this feature to characterize Xhosa depressors. On the other hand, they suggest (p. 39), following Kingston & Diehl (1994), that features like [voice] can have different phonetic implementations in different languages, and Xhosa could be considered a language where only a low-level feature, f0 lowering, implements [voice]. Since we are interested in pursuing their suggestion that Nguni depressors show parallels with Shanghai Chinese depressors, we have also assumed the strictest possible interpretation of their first proposal, namely, that the two languages implement the same feature in a parallel way. We return to this point in Section 5, below.

  10. 10.

    See work like Y. Chen (2008, submitted), M. Chen (2000), Duanmu (1997), Selkirk & Shen (1990), Yip (2002), Zee & Maddieson (1980) and references therein for more detailed discussion of the phonetics and phonology of the Shanghai Chinese tone system.

  11. 11.

    See Chen (2008) for a phonetic study of the f0 realization of the default L tone which leads to a somewhat different interpretation of how the non-neutralized tone contour of the initial syllable is realized in the sandhi domain from earlier proposals such as Selkirk & Shen (1990) and Duanmu (1993, 1997), among others.

  12. 12.

    See work like Cassimjee & Kisseberth (1998, 2001); Donnelly (2009); Downing (1990, 2009); Khumalo (1981, 1987); Rycroft (1980) and references therein for detailed discussion and analysis of aspects of the Nguni tone systems, including the depressor effects sketched here.

  13. 13.

    A possible explanation for this comes from the fact that register is not contrastive in Zulu. Further, the voiceless unaspirated vs. voiceless depressor contrast is marginal, due to the restricted number of morphemes beginning with voiceless unaspirated stops (Doke 1961: 8-9).

References

  • Bradshaw, Mary. 1999. A Cross-linguistic Study of Consonant-Tone Interaction. Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunelle, Marc. 2008. Speaker control in the phonetic implementation of Cham registers. Paper presented at TIE3, University of Lisbon, 16 September 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buell, Leston. 2005. Issues in Zulu Verbal Morphosyntax. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, J., and Ian Maddieson. 1992. An exploration of phonation types in Wu dialects of Chinese. Journal of Phonetics 20: 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassimjee, Farida. 1998. Isixhosa Tonology: An Optimal Domains Theory Analysis. Munich: Lincom Europa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassimjee, Farida, and Charles W. Kisseberth. 1998. Optimal Domains Theory and Bantu tonology: a case study from Isixhosa and Shingazidja. In Larry M. Hyman and Charles W. Kisseberth (eds.) Theoretical aspects of Bantu Tone, 33–132. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassimjee, Farida, and Charles W. Kisseberth. 2001. Zulu tonology and its relationship to other Nguni languages. In Shigeki Kaji (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium, Cross-linguistic Studies of Tonal Phenomena: Tonogenesis, Japanese Accentology and Other Topics, 327–359. Tokyo: ILCAA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Matthew. 2000. Tone Sandhi: Patterns across Chinese Dialects. Cambridge: CUP.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Yiya. 2007. The phonetics and phonology of consonant-F0 interaction in Shanghai Chinese. Talk presented at the workshop ‘Where Do Features Come From? Phonological Primitives in the Brain, the Mouth, and the Ear’. Paris, October 5, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Yiya. 2008. Revisiting the phonetics and phonology of Shanghai Tone Sandhi. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2008. Campinas, Brazil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Yiya. (submitted). How does phonology guide segment-f0 interaction?

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Yiya, and Carlos Gussenhoven (2008). Emphasis and tonal implementation. Journal of Phonetics 36: 724–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, G.N. 2003. Feature economy in sound systems. Phonology 20: 287–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, G.N., and Rajesh Khatiwada. 2007. Phonetic realization of contrastively aspirated affricates in Nepali. Proceedings of ICPhS XVI (Saarbrücken, 6–10 August 2007), 629–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doke, Clement M. 1961. Textbook of Zulu grammar. London: Longmans, Green and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, Simon. 2009. Tone and depression in Phuthi. In Michael Kenstowicz. (ed.) Data and Theory: Papers in Phonology in Celebration of Charles W. Kisseberth, Special issue,Language Sciences 31: 161–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing, Laura J. 1990. Local and metrical tone shift in Nguni. SAL21: 261–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing, Laura J. 2009. On pitch lowering not linked to voicing: Nguni and Shona group depressors. With an Appendix by Thilo C. Schadeberg. In Michael Kenstowicz. (ed.) Data and Theory: Papers in Phonology in Celebration of Charles W. Kisseberth, Special issue,Language Sciences 31: 179–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing, Laura J., and Bryan Gick. 2005. Voiceless tone depressors in Nambya and Botswana Kalang’a. BLS 27 (2001): 65–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duanmu, San. 1993. Rime Length, Stress, and Associated Domains. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 2: 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duanmu, San. 1997. Recursive constraint evaluation in Optimality Theory: evidence from cyclic compounds in Shanghai. NLLT 15: 465–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandour, J., Potisuk, S., and S. Dechongkit. 1994. Tonal coarticulation in Thai. Journal of Phonetics 22: 477–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannini, Antonella, Massimo Pettorino, and Maddalena Toscano. 1988. Some remarks on Zulu stops. AAP 13: 95–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hombert, Jean-Marie. 1978. Consonant type, vowel quality, and tone. In Victoria A. Fromkin (ed.) Tone: A Linguistic Survey, 77–111. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessen, Michael, and Justus C. Roux. 2002. Voice quality differences associated with stops and clicks in Xhosa. Journal of Phonetics 30: 1–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jun, Sun-Ah. 1996. Influence of microprosody on macrosprosody: a case of phrase initial strengthening. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 92: 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, Patricia A. 1988. The phonology-phonetics interface. In Frederik J. Newmeyer (ed.) Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, vol. I. Linguistic Theory: Foundations, 281–302. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenstowicz, Michael. 1994. Phonology in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khumalo, J.S.M. 1981. Zulu tonology, Part 1. African Studies 40: 53–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khumalo, J.S.M. 1987. An Autosegmental Account of Zulu Phonology. PhD dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingston, J., and R. L. Diehl. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70: 419–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kisseberth, Charles, and David Odden. 2003. Tone. In Derek Nurse and Gérard Philippson (eds.) The Bantu Languages, 59–70. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladefoged, Peter, and Ian Maddieson. 1996. The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Seunghun. 2008. Consonant-Tone Interaction in Optimality Theory. Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddieson, Ian. 2003. The sounds of the Bantu languages. In Derek Nurse and Gérard Philippson (eds.) The Bantu Languages, 15–41. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matisoff, James A. 1973. Tonogenesis in Southeast Asia. In Larry M. Hyman (ed.) Consonant types and tone, SCOPIL 1: 71–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ren, N. 1992. Phonation types and consonant distinctions: Shanghai Chinese. PhD dissertation, The University of Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rycroft, D.K. 1980. The ‘Depression’ Feature in Nguni Languages and Its Interaction With Tone. Communication no. 8, Dept. of African Languages, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, R.S.A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schadeberg, Thilo C. 2003. Derivation. In Derek Nurse and Gérard Philippson (eds.) The Bantu Languages, 71–89. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schadeberg, Thilo C. 2009. Appendix: On the origin of Zulu depressor consonants. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.) Data and Theory: Papers in Phonology in Celebration of Charles W. Kisseberth, Special issue, Language Sciences 31: 192–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth O., and Tong Shen. 1990. Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In Sharon Inkelas and Draga Zec (eds.) The Phonology-Syntax Connection, 313–337. Chicago: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, D. 2006. Acoustic evdience from the emergence of tonal contrast in contemporary Korean. Phonology23: 287–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strazny, Philipp. 2003. Depression in Zulu: tonal effects of segmental features. In Jeroen van de Weijer, Vincent J. van Heuven and Harry van der Hulst (eds.) The Phonological Spectrum, vol 1: Segmental Structure, 223–239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svantesson, Jan-Olof, and David House. 2006. Tone production, tone perception and Kammu tonogenesis. Phonology 23: 309–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Katrina E. 2008. The Phonology and Phonetics of Consonant-Tone Interaction. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traill, A. 1990. Depression without depressors. South African Journal of African Languages10: 166–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traill, A., J.S.M. Khumalo, and P. Fridjhon. 1987. Depressing facts about Zulu. African Studies 46: 255–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Richard. 1992. The effect of implosives on fundamental frequency in SiSwati. Paper presented at ACAL 23, 26–29 March 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, G., and Z. Tang (eds.). 1988. Shanghai Fangyan Gaikuang. Shanghai: Shanghai Educational Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, Y. 1997. Contextual tonal variations in Mandarin. Journal of Phonetics 25: 61–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yip, Moira. 2002. Tone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zee, Eric, and Ian Maddieson. 1980. Tones and tone sandhi in Shanghai: Phonetic evidence and phonological analysis. Glossa 14: 45–88

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank our Zulu language consultants for their help in constructing the Zulu data sets and for their patience in making the recordings on which the phonetic analysis is based. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the TIE3 conference in Lisbon. We thank the audience of that conference, along with four anonymous reviewers and the editors of this volume, for helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura J. Downing .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Zulu data set analyzed

All of the Zulu words in this list are verbs. The stem-initial syllables (‘=’ precedes the stem) contrast for the stop type: orthographic ph, th, kh are voiceless aspirated; p, k are voiceless unaspirated; bh, d, g are voiceless depressors; b is implosive. They also contrast for tone (High vs. default Low). In the recordings, these stems are preceded either by a sequence of High toned prefixes, [bá-yá=] ‘they are X’, or Low-toned prefixes, [si-ya=] ‘we are X’, to form complete one-word utterances. The data set is labeled to match the pitch track labels in Fig. 1 and 3.

Tone context and stop type

Zulu verb

Gloss

H_Aspirated_H

bá-yá=tháánda

‘they like’

 

bá-yá=pháátha

‘they are carrying (in the hand)’

 

bá-yá=phááka

‘they are serving’

 

bá-yá=kháála

‘they are crying’

 

bá-yá=thááka

‘they are mixing medicines’

H_Unaspirated_H

bá-yá=pááka

‘they are parking’

 

bá-yá=péénda

‘they are painting’

 

bá-yá=po´o´ka

‘they are haunting'

H_Depressor_H

bá-yá=bháála

‘they are writing’

 

bá-yá=bháánda

‘they are plastering a hut with mud’

 

bá-yá=dááya

‘they are dying (cloth)’

 

bá-yá=dáánsa

‘they are dancing’

H_Aspirated_L

bá-yá=phaanda

‘they are digging’

 

bá-yá=khaaba

‘they are kicking’

 

bá-yá=phaahla

‘they are daubing (mud)’

H_Unaspirated_L

bá-yá=kaakwa

‘they are being surrounded’

H_Depressor_L

bá-yá=gaaya

‘they are grinding’

 

bá-yá=bheeka

‘they are watching’

H_Implosive_H

bá-yá=báánda

‘they are cold’

 

bá-yá=báába

‘they are hot-tempered’

 

bá-yá=bíízwa

‘they are being called’

H_Implosive_L

bá-yá=baala

‘they are counting’

 

bá-yá=baamba

‘they are catching; holding’

Tone sequence

Zulu verb (‘=’ precedes the stem)

Gloss

L_Aspirated_H

si-ya=tháánda

‘we like’

 

si-ya=pháátha

‘we are carrying (in the hand)’

 

si-ya=phááka

‘we are serving’

 

si-ya=kháála

‘we are crying’

 

si-ya=thááka

‘we are mixing medicines’

L_Unaspirated_H

si-ya=pááka

‘we are parking’

 

si-ya=péénda

‘we are painting’

 

si-ya=po´o´ka

‘we are haunting'

L_Depressor_H

si-ya=bháála

‘we are writing’

 

si-ya=bháánda

‘we are plastering a hut with mud’

 

si-ya=dááya

‘we are dying (cloth)’

 

si-ya=dáánsa

‘we are dancing’

L_Aspirated_L

si-ya=phaanda

‘we are digging’

 

si-ya=khaaba

‘we are kicking’

 

si-ya=phaahla

‘we are daubing (mud)’

L_Unaspirated_L

si-ya=kaakwa

‘we are being surrounded’

L_Depressor_L

si-ya=gaaya

‘we are grinding’

 

si-ya=bheeka

‘we are watching’

L_Implosive_H

si-ya=báánda

‘we are cold’

 

si-ya=báába

‘we are hot-tempered’

 

si-ya=bíízwa

‘we are being called’

L_Implosive_L

si-ya=baala

‘we are counting’

 

si-ya=baamba

‘we are catching; holding’

Appendix 2 – The Zulu consonant inventory (Schadeberg 2009)

The spelling in this table follows modern orthography. It has the familiar arrangement where columns roughly correspond to places of articulation and rows to modes or manners of articulation. Some rows are further subdivided to show corresponding prenasalized consonants.

The shaded cells contain the depressor consonants, which are here also marked by a ‘combining diaeresis below’ (Unicode 1586). This marking is not part of standard orthography.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chen, Y., Downing, L.J. (2011). All Depressors are Not Alike: A Comparison of Shanghai Chinese and Zulu. In: Frota, S., Elordieta, G., Prieto, P. (eds) Prosodic Categories: Production, Perception and Comprehension. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0137-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics