Rachel Kesselman Advanced Phonetics

04.26.05

Spectrographic and Auditory Analysis of Rhotic Variants in Modern Hebrew

This project is designed to investigate the use of Modern Hebrew rhotics in casual

speech. It has been hypothesized by several researchers that the place of articulation of

rhotics changes in initial, medial, and final position. Therefore, subjects were asked to

produce these rhotics in several different environments to determine an exact place of

articulation (as well as a general understanding of which type of rhotic occurs within

different environments). After these tokens have been recorded and analyzed, both an

auditory and spectrographic analysis will be completed to further provide evidence of the

place of articulation.

Literature Review:

Many studies of Hebrew phonology and phonetics take a historical-diachronic

standpoint, and primarily investigate the pronunciation of Hebrew phonemes as handed

down through written and oral traditions in various communities of the Jewish world.

Therefore, current research in Modern Hebrew phonetics is difficult to find. Most of the

data was collected throughout the 1970’s. The research is most likely out of date due to

the rapid pace in which this language is changing. The most recent analysis of

pronunciation in Modern Hebrew phonetics and acoustics is an article entitled An

acoustic analysis of Modern Hebrew vowels and voiced consonants (Aronson et. al,

1996). This article analyzes the frequencies of the five monophthongal vowels and 9

voiced consonants in Modern Hebrew. The only rhotic analyzed in this study is the

frictionless velar continuant, although the authors do acknowledge that other forms exist.

Another piece of research that might provide some more details is a grammar of Modern

Hebrew by Ora Schwarzwald. The grammar was published in Lincolm Europa in 2001,

and also acknowledges some of the different variants of rhotics (although not in great

detail). Finally, the most comprehensive phonetic description of Hebrew was published

in 1977 as a dissertation in The Netherlands. Data was recorded from 29 native speakers,

and the book analyzes Modern Hebrew consonants, vowels, stress, and intonation.

Therefore, due to the lack of research in this area, my analysis will primarily be

based on spectrographic analyses of rhotics from different languages. The data from

these other languages will help describe what these sounds look like on a spectrogram, as

well as approximate formant frequencies and shapes. Individual characteristics of rhotic

pronunciation will be examined (which include the properties of fricatives, trills, and

uvulars).

Modern Hebrew Overview:

Modern Hebrew is part of the Semitic language family. As a revived spoken

language, it has only existed since about 1880. Throughout this time, native speakers

have continued to coin new words, and different aspects of the language change very

rapidly. The vocabulary is primarily based on Biblical Hebrew, but also includes

borrowings from other languages such as Arabic and Greek. In many cases, there can be

significant problems in obtaining accurate pronunciations of Hebrew words. In the past,

a distinction was made between Ashkenazi and Sephardic pronunciation. In Standard

Modern Hebrew, the Ashkenazi pronunciation (Jews living in Poland, Germany, etc) is

considered to be the most prestigious (this pronunciation utilizes a uvular trill).

However, there are still a large number of people that use the Sephardic pronunciation

(Jews living in Spain and Portugal). It is difficult to determine exactly where Ashkenazi

and Sephardic Jews live today since most of the Jewish people live all throughout Israel.

Therefore, because there is already a very small population of native Modern Hebrew

speakers on this campus, this distinction will be abandoned.

Rhotics:

It is hypothesized that three different rhotics occur in casual speech. A summary

of these realized phonemes and the environments that they most likely occur in are listed

below.

Sound Environment Example

Voiced alveo-dental trill

Word final position

חור‘Hole’

Voiced uvular trill

Initial and medial position

following back vowels or

consonants

היא גרה‘she lived’

Voiced velar fricative (although

frictionless in most cases)

Following or preceding fricatives

פריטה ‘privatized’

Rhotics in Hebrew can occur in several different environments. They are found in initial,

medial, and final position. They are always followed by a vowel in initial and medial

positions, but may also be part of a consonant cluster in the beginning of a word.

Methodology: In order to participate in the study, subjects were required to meet specific criteria:

1. they must not exhibit any speech or hearing disorders 2. Israel must be their place of birth 3. Hebrew must be their native language

4. they must be between the ages of 18-58

There was one expected problem in collecting this data. Although all of the subjects

were born in Israel and Hebrew is their native language, the majority of them (especially

the older speakers) have lived in the United States for quite some time. Therefore,

influences from English may affect their native pronunciation. The most likely place to

carry out this study would be in Israel. Doing so would eliminate any outside influences

from other languages because the study could be restricted to subjects that only speak

Modern Hebrew.

A total of 18 tokens were elicited from each speaker. These tokens consisted of a

mixture of nouns, adjectives, and verbs. No borrowed words were used in this

experiment. It is difficult to determine whether the rhotic pattern in borrowed words

completely fits into the native pronunciation paradigm or whether there are other factors

that come into play. Subjects pronounced six words in initial, medial, and final position.

To reduce reading effects, the token words were embedded in a larger list of words. For

each condition, the six token words appeared in a list of 20 words. This word list was

carefully constructed to insure that the filler words did not have any influence on the

token words. The word lists were provided to the subjects in Hebrew so they could read

words in their native orthography (and to eliminate any confusion about the

pronunciation of transliteration). A sample list of these tokens can be found below.

Initial Medial Final rega - moment shirim - songs sefer - book

rayon - idea mora - teacher mevugar - adult rasha - wicked aruchat - meal cadur - ball rahit - furniture martef - basement kar - cold ratsu - they ran tirgamti - I translated hor - hole rakevet - train aron - cupboard nayir - paper

The recordings were collected in a quiet room using a head-mounted Altec

Lansing AHS302 Headset with a frequency response of 20-16,000 Hz. To make and edit

the initial recordings, Adobe Audition was used. The spectrographic analysis was

performed using the acoustic analysis software Praat.

Spectrographic Analysis of Rhotics:

To analyze Modern Hebrew rhotics, there are several properties that will be

investigated on the spectrogram. First, the general class of rhotics primarily displays a

lowered F3 that is narrowly separated from F2. Therefore, regardless of the place and

manner of articulation, I would expect each rhotic to display this general characteristic.

The second property concerns fricatives. This class of sounds appears as high-frequency

noise generated on a spectrogram. Although I mention that one of the rhotics is a velar

fricative earlier in the paper, it is possible that the velar variant is a frictionless continuant

(which may make spectrographic analysis more difficult because a high-frequency noise

component will not be present). The next class of properties concerns those made when

producing a trill. The trill is an easy component to distinguish on a spectrogram because

it will display distinct pulsations depending on how fast or slow the sound is produced.

The most difficult sound to distinguish from the others is a uvular consonant. Although

extensive research has been completed on uvulars, a definitive answer still does not exist

as to what characteristics differentiate uvulars from other back consonants. The property

that has been most accepted by other scholars is that uvulars will display a very low F2,

as well as a lower noise burst.

Results:

The results of this study differ greatly from the original hypothesis. First and

foremost, both of the rhotic sounds used in Modern Hebrew are uvular. The two variants

are a uvular trill and uvular approximant. The uvular trill is most often used in initial and

medial position, while the uvular approximant is used a majority of the times in final

position. The results of each subject are listed below. As is evident, there is substantial

variation across speakers (which is primarily due to the distinction between Ashkenazoid

and Sephardic pronunciation). Following a table of results, spectrograms for three out of

the six words in initial, medial, and final position are presented. The spectrograms

displayed exactly what was hypothesized for both of the rhotics: F3 narrowly separated

from F2 as well as characteristics of trills and approximants. The energy in rhotics is far

less than that of other consonants; therefore, several of the formants do not exhibit very

dark bands of energy. In initial, medial, and final position, the formants and their

transitions are actually very difficult to locate. In some of the final position tokens, it

also appears as if the formants are absent. Most of the spectrograms also display a fairly

low F2 for all of the rhotics, with several of the tokens occurring below 2,000 Hz. This

(for the most part) indicates that these two sounds are uvular. Low F2 has been the one

property that most scholars agree characterize rhotic and pharyngeal sounds.

As for the approximants, it would be easier to identify them if they exhibited a

high frequency noise component. Without this component, however, they appear very

similar to an alveolar rhotic. This makes them very difficult to distinguish on a

spectrogram.

Token Sub. 101 Sub. 102 Sub. 103 Sub. 104 Sub. 105 Sub. 106 Sub. 107INITIAL

rega uvular trill uvular approximant uvular trill uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

raayon uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

rasha uvular trill uvular approximant uvular trill uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

rahit uvular trill uvular approximant uvular trill uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

ratsu uvular trill uvular approximant uvular trill uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

rakevet uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

MEDIAL

shirim uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

morah uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

aruxah uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

martef uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

tirgamti uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

aron uvular trill uvular approximant uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular trill

FINAL

sefer uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

mevugar uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

cadur uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

kar uvular trill uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

xor uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

niyar uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant uvular approximant

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

INITIAL WORD: rasha ‘wicked’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

INITIAL WORD: rakevet ‘train’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

INITIAL WORD: rega ‘moment’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

MEDIAL WORD: aron ‘cupboard’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

MEDIAL WORD: aruxah ‘meal’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

MEDIAL WORD:martef ‘basement’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

FINAL WORD: cadur ‘ball’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

FINAL WORD: kar ‘cold’

Subject 101 Subject 102

Subject 103 Subject 104

Subject 105 Subject 106

Subject 107

FINAL WORD: sefer ‘book’

Discussion:

There are several interesting points that warrant further discussion. First and

foremost, there is a great deal of variation between speakers. This is primarily due to that

distinction between Ashkenazi and Sephardic pronunciation. Perhaps the pronunciation

would be more uniform among younger speakers since they are the third generation that

now speaks Modern Hebrew. The majority of the subjects that were used ranged from

35-50. Therefore, perhaps the differences in pronunciation end there.

The second point worth noting is that out of 126 tokens, the uvular trill was only

used 31 times, while the rest of the utterances were voiced uvular approximants. Perhaps

this gives further evidence that the uvular trill is beginning to disappear in casual speech.

However, it is also important to take into consideration the fact that six of these subjects

have lived in the United States for quite some time. Therefore, it is very possible that

their English has had an effect on their native pronunciation. This study would most

likely yield a more consistent result if it were carried out in Israel.

Finally, the results are not nearly as consistent as had been originally

hypothesized. It appears as if environment does not play a role in determining which

variant of the rhotic is used. The only conclusion that can be gathered from this data is

that a change is occurring at the present time in Modern Hebrew. It appears as if the

uvular trill is slowly dying out and being replaced with the uvular approximant. For a

long time, the uvular trill of the Ashkenazi pronunciation was standard, and it now

appears that the uvular approximant is becoming the standard.

Conclusions:

Although there is nothing extremely conclusive about this data, it does provide evidence

for a few observations in Modern Hebrew. First, the two variants of the rhotics used in

the language are a voiced uvular trill and a voiced uvular approximant. Second, there is

great variation in the pronunciation of these sounds by the subjects. Finally, perhaps this

is evidence indicating that Modern Hebrew is currently in a shift: the uvular trill, which

has been deemed the standard pronunciation for several years, could possibly be leaning

towards the less standard pronunciation. In its place, a voiced uvular approximant

appears as if it is now taking its place. Modern Hebrew is a very young language and

differences in pronunciation emerge all the time in throughout the world. Therefore, the

final conclusion is that Hebrew is still immersed in this shift, and that by the time it is

done, the voiced uvular approximant will be the only rhotic left in this language.

Expected Contributions:

Since recent research in Hebrew phonetics and acoustics is rare, I hope that this

analysis will help spark interest in a language that is both extremely intriguing and

understudied. Modern Hebrew is evolving very quickly, and without constant research, it

is very difficult to keep up with these changes. Although this study only analyzes one

type of sound, there are other sounds in Hebrew that behave similarly and deserve their

own study.

For a long period of time, scholars did not believe that Modern Hebrew was a

‘real’ language because it was written off as having been invented by one man. The

language has been ignored for a long period of time; however, scholars are finally

beginning to realize that Modern Hebrew is indeed a real language with several

fascinating aspects. I predict that more research will be done in the coming future to

examine all of the intriguing aspects of this language that (as a spoken variety) has only

existed for approximately 125 years.

Select References: 1. Aronson, L; Rosenhouse, J; Rosenhouse, G; Podoshin, L. An acoustic analysis of

Modern Hebrew vowels and voiced consonants. Journal of Phonetics, 1996, 24, 2, Apr, 283-293.

2. Schwarzwald, Ora R. Modern Hebrew. Munchen; Lincolm Europa, 2001. 3. Taff, Alice; Rozelle, Lorna. Phonetic structures of Aleut. Journal of Phonetics,

2001, 29, 231-271. 4. Laufer, Asher; Baer, Thomas. The emphatic and pharyngeal sounds in Hebrew

and in Arabic. Haskins Laboratories Status Report on Speech Research, 1988, 95-96, July-Dec, 51-71.