Re: Why formants for I closer to e than to i

Ruud Harmsen <realemailseesite13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 19 Jun 2005 17:43:59 -0700: "ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx"
> <ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:

> >Why are the formants for [I] nearly identical to the ones for [e] and
> >significantly different from the ones for [i]? I'd have expected [I] to
> >be closer to [i] than to [e].

> I never really understood the phonectic of articulatory difference
> between [e] and [I]. Perhaps they are really are the same, and have
> different symbol because of the role they can play in some languages.
....

The size of the front cavity is similar, but the articulation is very
different. The blade of the tongue is convex for [e] (or at least
it feels that way) but concave for [I]. The concavity enlarges the
front cavity, but the higher tongue position for [I] makes it
smaller, so the two articulatory adjustments going from [e] to [I]
can more or less cancel out, giving similar 2nd formant levels.
The difference in tongue configuration is parallel to that between
[s] and [S].

--
Greg Lee <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
.