Spectrograms

Question

I've been noodling around the net but there's too much for me to take in. I'm interested in knowing how idiosyncratically a spectrogram can capture a manner of speaking. Are they unique like fingerprints? If everyone on aue had a spectrogram made of them saying 'mary merry marry' how similar and how different might they look?
Would RP 'bath' look very different from some Northern England regional pronunciation of 'bath'? Is it the case that there are noticeable variants in the same person pronouncing the same word over and over?
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]I've been noodling around the net but there's too much for me to take in. I'm interested in knowing how ... Is it the case that there are noticeable variants in the same person pronouncing the same word over and over?[/nq]
Interesting question.
I know that any wave of any arbitrary complexity can be separated into a (large) number of sine waves of differing frequencies and amplitudes. The process is called Fourier Analysis, I seem to recall.

I suspect that there is sufficient difference between different people's voices saying the same word(s) to tell them apart, even if one is mimicking the other. I think that organisations such as the FBI can identify voice prints quite accurately. The more recent versions of Word can accept voice input, after you have 'trained' the software by repeating certain phrases to it until it 'learns' your method of pronunciation.

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I've been noodling around the net but there's too much ... the same person pronouncing the same word over and over?[/nq]
[nq:1]Interesting question. I know that any wave of any arbitrary complexity can be separated into a (large) number of sine waves of differing frequencies and amplitudes. The process is called Fourier Analysis, I seem to recall.[/nq]
You recall correctly, but for "large", substitute "countably infinite".

Mike Nitabach

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I've been noodling around the net but there's too much for me to take in. I'm interested in knowing how ... John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply Would RP 'bath' look very different from some Northern England regional pronunciation of 'bath'?[/nq]
You could certainly pick up the different vowel sound, if only because the southern variant physically takes more time.I do some work on this and it's certainly possible to pick up regional variation in the wave form of a particular word. A couple of years ago I did an analysis of a Southern BrE speaker and a New Yorker (both women). We were looking at intrusive j (yuh) sounds - anecdotally you'd expect the New Yorker to say 'Noo' for 'New' and a southern brit to say 'Njoo' - in fact it wasn't remotely that simple (in the 'new' example exactly opposite) , they both used both forms and had them equally - though differently - distributed.

Anyway, the extra j phoneme in the waveform of the brit's realisation of 'new' is clearly visible. I've also just done some segmental work in which speakers read a list of body parts (don't ask). One of my speakers (a Californian) spoke possibly a bit too slowly and precisely for the purpose I needed the clip for - pronouncing 'chest' with a long gap before the final t sound. I tried shortening the gap - taking a little out made for a more authentic sound.

(IMHO). Certainly the extra length gap would show up clearly on the waveform.
[nq:1]had a spectrogram made of them saying 'mary merry marry' how similar and how different might they look?[/nq]
They'd look similar, but noticeably different. It would also be possible given patience and a burning need to avoid doing something more important (like finishing the paper I'm currently desperately trying to avoid working on) to cut and paste the vowel sounds and change one to the other. This is more easily done with consonants - 'chest' to 'chess' is obviously a piece of cake (you could even do it on magnetic tape given no life whatsoever and a sharp pair of scissors).
[nq:1]Are they unique like fingerprints?[/nq]
There's a piece in David Crystal's Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language about 'voiceprints', their history as being legal evidence in the US (checkered) and the work of one Lawrence Kersta (has to be worth a Google).

Is it the case that there are noticeable
[nq:1]variants in the same person pronouncing the same word over and over? [/nq]
Yes. Each waveform will have a similar shape (what synthesiser musicians call an envelope) but variations in pitch, intonation and volume will inevitably make each unique and probably noticably different to the naked eye - as you up the resolution of the waveform (zoom in on the graphic) you're bound eventually to spot differences.
Hope this is of interest
DC Cat

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Interesting question. I know that any wave of any arbitrary ... The process is called Fourier Analysis, I seem to recall.[/nq]
[nq:1]You recall correctly, but for "large", substitute "countably infinite".[/nq]
Thanks. It's pretty near 40 years since I used any maths much more complex than simple arithmetic.

wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Quiet part of Hertfordshire
England

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Hope this is of interest DC Cat[/nq]
Very much - thanks.

John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply

Usenet · Answer

John,
The majority in USA think they say Mary, marry, merry the same. What I wonder about is whether in/ing/ink have the same vowel and how to test this.
tom z

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I've been noodling around the net but there's too much for me to take in. I'm interested in knowing how ... on aue had a spectrogram made of them saying 'mary merry marry' how similar and how different might they look?[/nq]
When I took Phonology in about 1983, the prof discussed their use in court. Essentially, there are sufficient differences between speakers that it is often trivial to take two spectrograms of the same sentence (say one off a recording and one given by the defendent) and say confidently "These were not made by the same person, even though they are indistinguishable to the ear". On the other hand, if someone says on the basis of sound spectrograms "This recording was made by the defendent and could be no other", they're either incompetent or committing perjury.
[nq:1]Would RP 'bath' look very different from some Northern England regional pronunciation of 'bath'? Is it the case that there are noticeable variants in the same person pronouncing the same word over and over?[/nq]
There are definite traits you can find having to do with formant height, voicing onset time, and such, but you have to be careful, as what people do is adjust their speech until it "sounds like" that of the community they grow up in. This is a problem that admits of more than one solution, so even within a given dialect, you can expect to see differences that, taken together, wind up sounding "the same".

I'm a good case in point. For some reason, all of my /l/s, when speaking English, are velar. (Most English speakers, including those I grew up with, use an alveolar (l) before and between vowels and a velar (l~) after vowels.) It's not that I have any trouble pronouncing an alveolar (l), and, indeed, I picked it up without noticing when I learned Spanish. It just sounded right to me and was obviously "close enough" for others. It wasn't until I took Phonology in college and learned that I was supposed to be using an alveolar that I realized that I was different. This, of course, would show up quite clearly on a sound spectrogram, but it has nothing to do with my dialect.

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >First Law of Anthropology:
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 > If they're doing something youPalo Alto, CA 94304 > don't understand, it's either an

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I'm a good case in point. For some reason, all of my /l/s, when speaking English, are velar. (Most English speakers, includingthose I grew up with, use an alveolar (l) before and between vowels and a velar (l~) after vowels.)[/nq]
Actually velar, or just velarised? What I've read is that the "dark" one is typically still alveolar, but velarised, and this seems to fit my own speech fairly well, though I don't feel a big difference between the two allophones.
Of course some dialects (e.g. Welsh English) have clear (l) everywhere, and the likes of Estuary English turn the dark /l/ into a vowel (e.g. "fiwm").
Jonathan

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I'm a good case in point. For some reason, all ... before and between vowels and a velar (l~) after vowels.)[/nq]
[nq:1]Actually velar, or just velarised? What I've read is that the "dark" one is typically still alveolar, but velarised, and this seems to fit my own speech fairly well, though I don't feel a big difference between the two allophones.[/nq]
Mine is certainly velar. The tip of the tongue remains on the floor of the mouth. I'm pretty sure that the standard is velar, although it wouldn't surprise me if some speakers have a velarized alveolar.

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >Theories are not matters of fact,
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 >they are derived from observingPalo Alto, CA 94304 >fact. If you don't have data, you

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Actually velar, or just velarised? What I've read is that ... I don't feel a big difference between the two allophones.[/nq]
[nq:1]Mine is certainly velar. The tip of the tongue remains on the floor of the mouth. I'm pretty sure that the standard is velar, althoughit wouldn't surprise me if some speakers have a velarized alveolar.[/nq]
Crystal's Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language uses English dark /l/ as an example of velarisation. Maybe the genuinely velar one is less common in the UK.
Jonathan

Spectrograms

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions