Phonetic aspects of many languages have been documented, though the breadth and focus of such documentation varies substantially. In this survey, phonetic aspects (here called "categories") that are typically reported were assessed in three English-language collections-the Illustrations of the IPA, articles from the Journal of Phonetics, and papers from the Ladefoged/Maddieson Sounds of the World's Languages (SOWL) documentation project. Categories were defined for consonants (e.g., Voice Onset Time (VOT) and frication spectrum; 10 in total), vowels (e.g., formants and duration; 7 total) and suprasegmentals (e.g., stress and distinctive vowel length, 6 total). The Illustrations, due to their brevity, had, on average, limited coverage of the selected categories (12% of the 23 categories). Journal of Phonetics articles were typically theoretically motivated, but 64 had sufficient measurements to count as phonetic documentation; these also covered 12% of the categories. The SOWL studies, designed to cover as much of the phonetic structure as feasible in an article-length treatment, achieved 41% coverage on average. Four book-length studies were also examined, with an average of 49% coverage. Phonetic properties of many language families have been studied, though Indo-European is still disproportionately represented. Physiological measures were excluded as being less common, and perceptual measures were excluded as being typically more theoretical. This preliminary study indicates that certain acoustic properties of languages are typically measured and may be considered as an impetus for later, fuller coverage, but broader consensus on the categories is needed. Current documentation efforts could be more useful if these considerations were addressed.

Temporal lengthening of gestures and segments located in a boundary-adjacent syllable has been found in both pre- and postboundary contexts. However, the temporal extent or scope of this lengthening, particularly in the articulatory domain, is not well described. We address the question of scope of prosodic lengthening by considering specifically whether prominence interacts with boundary-related articulatory lengthening in such a way that prominent elements not immediately at a phrase edge are lengthened relative to the same prominent elements phrase-medially (i.e. at a considerable distance from a boundary). Articulatory kinematic data were collected for three subjects to analyze consonant constrictions of prominent syllables located (1) either immediately before or after a boundary and (2) two and three syllables away from that boundary. The results indicate that, as expected, gestures undergo prosodic lengthening when immediately local to the phase boundary. However, some subjects did display prosodic lengthening at a small remove from the boundary for a prominent syllable. This effect was strongest in the postboundary condition. These results suggest that a consideration of prominence may be relevant in understanding the temporal patterning of boundary-related articulatory lengthening.

This study is an acoustic investigation of the nature and extent of consonant voicing of the stop /b/ in two dialectal varieties of American English spoken in south-central Wisconsin and western North Carolina. The stop /b/ occurred at the juncture of two words such as small bids, in a position between two voiced sonorants, i.e. the liquid /l/ and a vowel. Twenty women participated, ten representing the Wisconsin and ten the North Carolina variety, respectively. Significant dialectal differences were found in the voicing patterns. The Wisconsin stop closures were usually not fully voiced and terminated in a complete silence followed by a closure release whereas North Carolina speakers produced mostly fully voiced closures. Further dialectal differences included the proportion of closure voicing as a function of word emphasis. For Wisconsin speakers, the proportion of closure voicing was smallest when the word was emphasized and it was greatest in non-emphatic positions. For North Carolina speakers, the degree of word emphasis did not have an effect on the proportion of closure voicing. The results suggest different mechanisms by which closure voicing is maintained in these two dialects, pointing to active articulatory maneuvers in North Carolina speakers and passive in Wisconsin speakers.