Talk:Sulcalization

Vs. assibilation.

"Consonant sulcalization" as a process appears to overlap with assibilation. Is this supposed to cover a wider spectrum however, eg. including some cases of rhotacization? --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 21:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Liverpool accent

I came to this article from a conversation with a friend on Facebook, who was discussing the sibilant ⟨t⟩ of a Scouse (Liverpudlian) accent, which still distinguishes a minimal pair of hit and hiss (presumably /hit̞/ and /his/). Does that contradict the claim in the first paragraph, presumably from Catford (1977), that "no language is known to contrast a grooved and non-grooved sibilant"? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 16:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

No, because the consonant in hit is a non-sibilant fricative. --Ahls23 (talk) 17:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

sulcalization as ᵓ

Is there precedent for this convention outside the small body of work on Tillamook? Célestine-Edelweiß (talk) 05:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

what is sulcalization, really?

@Kwamikagami you are the primary author of most of the content on this page, and the content which I am referring to below, though a large portion of it dates back to 2011 when the page was first created.

Problems with current page info

The definition at the top of this page reads:

Sulcalization (from Latin: sulcus 'groove'), in phonetics, is the pronunciation of a sound, typically a sibilant consonant, such as English /s/ and /z/, with a deep groove running along the back of the tongue that focuses the airstream on the teeth, producing a more intense sound. This is accomplished by raising the sides of the back of the tongue ("lateral contraction") and leaving a hollow along the mid-line.

However, it seems like both the definition listed above is a conflation between sulcalization and another unrelated concept which also uses the word "grooved", and that sulcalization itself has conflicting definitions in the articulatory direction it describes. I am looking for some insight or assistance to remedy this.

Additionally, the following mention of "sulcalization in historical linguistics" has no citations, and the only reference I can find of "sulcalization" being used to describe this sound change (outside of mirrors of this page) is a 2014 blog, which likely only uses such a term because they read the WP entry below, which has been around since 2011:

In phonology and historical linguistics, sulcalization is the development of such a groove in a non-sulcal consonant. For example, close vowels triggered this effect in Japanese, where historic *tu and *ti have become [tsu] and [tɕi], respectively. A similar sound change also took place in the history of the Senufo languages. (The palatalization of *tsi to [tɕi] in Japanese is a different process and does not occur in Senufo.)

Unless you have a reference for this still, I think it should definitely be removed, as it only adds to more confusing conflations.

References

I've split quotes up below into 3 sections:

• "'Grooved' fricatives" for what I believe is a conflated separate phenomenon
• "Sulcalization (vertical)" for what is clearly referring to concavity down the center of the tongue; in addition, all either suggest a process in relation to velarization, or suggest an association with "bunching" in articulation
• "Sulcalization (others)" for ones which are either vague or seem to conflict with the vertical definition; these ones all refer to "internal rounding", or also suggest a process in relation to velarization, or both; a few of these descriptions also sound similar to "bunching" features

While all of the sources which actually mention sulcalization (not grooved fricatives) refer to association with "bunching" or velarization, those are vastly different features than longitudinal concavity down the tongue, so it seems a lot of wires are getting crossed even in the literature.

'Grooved' fricatives

Catford (1977) :

Pg 127:

Some writers make a considerable point of differences in the cross-sectional shape of articulatory strictures, distinguishing between typically grooved fricatives (such as English [s]), and typically slit fricatives (such as English [θ]). In grooved fricatives there is a narrow, central groove between the articulators, while in slit fricatives the lower articulator has a flatter shape, so that the articulation channel itself is rather wide and flat.

Pg 153:

According to this terminology [θ] is flat and [s], for example, is grooved. However, as we said there, it is probable that the crucial characteristic here is not the transverse shape of the channel, but its cross-sectional area. Thus [θ], irrespective of the shape of its channel, has a channel area that is three or four times that of [s], and this means that for a given volume-velocity the velocity of air-flow through the [s] channel is three or four times that of flow through the [θ] channel, and it is this velocity difference which is crucial.

Sulcalization (vertical)

Lowman (1932) :

The 'dark' or velarized, very dental lateral is non-fricative and is sulcalized by the rounding upwards of the edges of the back of the tongue. When final after a long vowel the degree of this sulcalization is more noticeable.

Jones (1950) :

sulcalization, when vowels are said with a "throaty" voice-quality due to sulcal tongue position (raising the sides of the back part of the tongue and leaving a groove down the centre)

Catford (2001) :

These seem to show sulcalization (concavity of the tongue surface forming a shallow longitudinal median trough). The tongue shape of their back r is not dissimilar to X-ray pictures of 'molar r' and 'bunched r' provided by later authors.

King (2020) :

sulcalization (or tongue-dorsum concavity) Associated with bunched tongue shapes, creates a visible concave-shaped dip in the midsagittal tongue surface.

Sulcalization (others)

Catford (1977) :

Pg 157:

If the apex is kept low down and the blade brought close to the postalveolar (or, a fortiori, the prepalatal) subzone, the whole body of the tongue behind that point is normally convex, the dorsal surface to some degree forming a smooth convex dome, swelling upwards towards the hard palate. The shape of the oral resonator thus formed behind the articulation is such as to impart some degree of 'clear', 'palatal' or '[i]-like' quality to lamino-postalveolar (or lamino-prepalatal) [ʃ], which consequently appears to be somewhat 'palatalized'.
If, on the other hand, the apex is raised to form an articulation at the postalveolar (or a fortiori, the prepalatal) subzone, then the body of the tongue immediately behind the apex will be less convex than in a lamino-postalveolar articulation. It is, in fact, often concave ("sulcalized") immediately behind the articulation, with further back a convexly domed, upward swelling of the dorsum towards the soft palate. The shape of the oral resonator thus formed behind the articulation is such as to impart some degree of 'dark', 'velar' or '[o]-like' quality to apico-postalveolar [ʃ]. which, consequently, appears to be somewhat 'velarized'.

Lass (1984) :

It's worth noting that most auditory/articulatory parameters are more complex than they seem, even simple ones like 'rounding': some RP speakers, for instance, produce a vowel of unmistakeable [ɒ]-quality in hot, etc. with neutral or spread lips. The effect here is produced by a hollowing or sulcalization of the tongue-body.

Trask (1996) :

Pg 183:

(internal rounding) - The phenomenon in which the perceptual effect of a rounded vowel is produced without lip-rounding by sulcalization of the tongue.

Pg 342:

(sulcalized) - The term is applied to the upper surface of the tongue in a configuration in which the tip and the back are both raised but the front is lowered, yielding a concave outline, as in the articulation of a dark l or in internal rounding.

oklopfer (💬) 21:35, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I will probably update this page later today. Based on the literature I have been able to find, there is indeed a conflation going on, due to very similar articulatory features.

Both 'grooved fricatives' and 'sulcalization' involve raising sides of the tongue and directing airflow down the middle, though nowhere have I been able to find the two terms be called synonymous; the former is always used in the context of sibilants, and often mentions dental friction from the sides of the tongue in directing said airflow; while the latter is always used in the context of dorsal concavity, which is produced much further back and does not involve any friction with the teeth. I am not sure if 'grooved fricatives' should even be mentioned on this page, since the only relation they have to sulcalization is the tongue forms a similar shape. oklopfer (💬) 15:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)