| Manners of articulation |
|---|
| Obstruent |
| Plosive (occlusive) |
| Affricate |
| Fricative |
| Sibilant |
| Sonorant |
| Nasal |
| Flap/Tap |
| Approximant |
| Liquid |
| Vowel |
| Semivowel |
| Lateral |
| Trill |
| Airstreams |
| Pulmonic |
| Ejective |
| Implosive |
| Click |
| Alliteration |
| Assonance |
| Consonance |
| See also: Place of articulation |
| This page contains phonetic information in IPA, which may not display correctly in some browsers. [Help] |
A sibilant is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. The symbols in the International Phonetic Alphabet used to denote the sibilant sounds in these words are, respectively, [s] [z] [ʃ] [tʃ] [dʒ] [ʒ]. (The sounds [tʃ] [dʒ], as in chip and Jeep, are affricates; the rest are fricatives.) Sibilants have a characteristically intense sound, which accounts for their non-linguistic use in getting one's attention (e.g. calling someone using "sssst!" or quieting someone using "shhhh!").
In the alveolar hissing sibilants [s] and [z], the back of the tongue forms a narrow channel (is grooved) to focus the stream of air more intensely, resulting in a high pitch. With the hushing sibilants (occasionally termed shibilants), such as English [ʃ], [tʃ], [ʒ], and [dʒ], the tongue is flatter, and the resulting pitch lower.
Sibilants may also be called stridents, a term which refers to the perceptual intensity of the sound of a sibilant consonant, or obstacle fricatives/affricates, which refers to the critical role of the teeth in producing the sound as an obstacle to the airstream. Non-sibilant fricatives and affricates produce their characteristic sound directly with the tongue or lips etc. and the place of contact in the mouth, without secondary involvement of the teeth.
The characteristic intensity of sibilants means that small variations in tongue shape and position are perceivable, with the result that there are a large number of sibilant types that contrast in various languages.
Contents |
Sibilants are louder than their non-sibilant counterparts, and most of their acoustic energy occurs at higher frequencies than non-sibilant fricatives. [s] has the most acoustic strength at around 8,000 Hz, but can reach as high as 10,000 Hz. [ʃ] has the bulk of its acoustic energy at around 4,000 Hz, but can extend up to around 8,000 Hz.
All sibilants are coronal consonants (made with the tip or front part of the tongue). However, there is a great deal of variety among sibilants as to tongue shape, point of contact on the tongue, and point of contact on the upper side of the mouth.
The following variables affect sibilant sound quality, and, along with their possible values, are ordered from sharpest (highest-pitched) to dullest (lowest-pitched):
Generally, the values of the different variables co-occur so as to produce an overall sharper or duller sound. For example, a laminal denti-alveolar grooved sibilant occurs in Polish, and a subapical palatal retroflex sibilant occurs in Toda.
The main distinction is the shape of the tongue. Most sibilants have a groove running down the centerline of the tongue that helps focus the airstream, but it's not known how widespread this is. In addition, the following tongue shapes are described, from sharpest and highest-pitched to dullest and lowest-pitched:
The latter three post-alveolar types of sounds are often known as "hushing" sounds because of their quality, as opposed to the "hissing" alveolar sounds. The alveolar sounds in fact occur in several varieties, in addition to the normal sound of English s:
Speaking non-technically, the retroflex consonant [ʂ] sounds somewhat like a mixture between the regular English [ʃ] of "ship" and a strong American "r"; while the alveolo-palatal consonant [ɕ] sounds somewhat like a mixture of English [ʃ] of "ship" and the [sj] in the middle of "miss you".
Sibilants can be made at any coronal articulation, i.e. the tongue can contact the upper side of the mouth anywhere from the upper teeth (dental) to the hard palate (palatal), with the in-between articulations being denti-alveolar, alveolar and postalveolar.
The tongue can contact the upper side of the mouth with the very tip of the tongue (an apical articulation, e.g. [ʃ̺]); with the surface just behind the tip, called the blade of the tongue (a laminal articulation, e.g. [ʃ̻]); or with the underside of the tip (a subapical articulation). Apical and subapical articulations are always tongue-up, with the tip of the tongue above the teeth, while laminal articulations can be either tongue-up or tongue-down, with the tip of the tongue behind the lower teeth. This distinction is particularly important for retroflex sibilants, because all three varieties can occur, with noticeably different sound qualities. For more information on these variants and their relation to sibilants, see the article on postalveolar consonants.
For tongue-down laminal articulations, an additional distinction can be made depending on where exactly behind the lower teeth the tongue tip is placed. A little ways back from the lower teeth is a hollowed area (or pit) in the lower surface of the mouth. When the tongue tip rests in this hollowed area, there is an empty space below the tongue (a sublingual cavity), which results in a relatively duller sound. When the tip of the tongue rests against the lower teeth, there is no sublingual cavity, resulting in a sharper sound. Usually, the position of the tip of the tongue correlates with the grooved vs. hushing tongue shape so as to maximize the differences. However, the palato-alveolar sibilants in the Northwest Caucasian languages such as Ubykh are an exception. These sounds have the tongue tip resting directly against the lower teeth, which gives the sounds a quality that Catford describes as "hissing-hushing". Ladefoged and Maddieson[3] term this a "closed laminal postalveolar" articulation, and transcribe them (following Catford) as [ŝ, ẑ], although this is not an IPA notation. See the article on postalveolar consonants for more information.
The following table shows the types of sibilant fricatives defined in the International Phonetic Alphabet:
| Voiceless | Voiced | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IPA | Description | Example | IPA | Description | Example | ||||||
| Language | Orthography | IPA | Meaning | Language | Orthography | IPA | Meaning | ||||
| voiceless alveolar sibilant | English | sip | [sɪp] | sip | voiced alveolar sibilant | English | zip | [zɪp] | zip | ||
| voiceless alveolo-palatal sibilant | Mandarin | 小 (xiǎo) | [ɕiɑu˨˩˦] | small | voiced alveolo-palatal sibilant | Polish | zioło | [ʑɔwɔ] | herb | ||
| voiceless palato-alveolar sibilant | English | shin | [ʃɪn] | shin | voiced palato-alveolar sibilant | English | vision | [vɪʒən] | vision | ||
| voiceless retroflex sibilant | Mandarin | 上海 (Shànghǎi) | [ʂɑ̂ŋ.xàɪ] | Shanghai | voiced retroflex sibilant | Russian Polish |
жаба żaba |
[ʐaba] | toad frog |
||
Diacritics can be used for finer detail. For example, apical and laminal alveolars can be specified as [s̺] vs [s̻]; a dental (or more likely denti-alveolar) sibilant as [s̪]; a palatalized alveolar as [sʲ]; and a generic "retracted sibilant" as [s̠], a transcription frequently used for the sharper-quality types of retroflex consonants (e.g. the laminal "flat" type and the "apico-alveolar" type). There is no diacritic to denote the laminal "closed" articulation of palato-alveolars in the Northwest Caucasian languages, but they are sometimes provisionally transcribed as [ŝ ẑ].
The attested possibilities, with exemplar languages, are as follows. Note that the IPA diacritics are simplified; some articulations would require two diacritics to be fully specified, but only one is used in order to keep the results legible without the need for OpenType IPA fonts. Also, Ladefoged has resurrected an obsolete IPA symbol, the under dot, to indicate apical postalveolar (normally included in the category of retroflex consonants), and that notation is used here. (Note that the notation s̠, ṣ is sometimes reversed; either may also be called 'retroflex' and written ʂ.)
| IPA | Tongue shape | Place of articulation (mouth) | Place of articulation (tongue) | Exemplifying languages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [s̺̪ z̺̪] | hollow | dental | apical | southeast European Spanish s/z, Kumeyaay |
| [s̪ z̪] | hollow | denti-alveolar | laminal | Polish s, z; Basque z, tz |
| [s̺ z̺] | hollow | alveolar | apical | northern peninsular Spanish s; Basque s, ts; Mandarin s, z, c (apical, dental or alveolar) |
| [s z] | hollow | alveolar | apical or laminal | English s, z (alveolar, laminal or apical); American or southwest European Spanish s/z |
| [s̻ z̻] | hollow | alveolar | laminal | Toda, Ubykh, Abkhaz |
| [ʃ ʒ] | domed | postalveolar | apical or laminal | English sh, ch, j, zh and French ch, j ([ʃʷ ʒʷ]) |
| [ʃ̻ ʒ̻] | domed | postalveolar | laminal | Toda; Basque x, tx |
| [ɕ ʑ] | palatalized | postalveolar | laminal | Mandarin x, j, q; Polish ć, ś, ź, dź; Ubykh; Abkhaz |
| [ŝ ẑ] (ad hoc transcription) | hollow (no cavity) |
postalveolar | laminal | Ubykh; Abkhaz |
| [s̱ ẕ], [ʂ̻ ʐ̻] | hollow or flat (cavity under tongue) |
postalveolar | laminal | Polish sz, rz, cz, dż ([ʂ̻ʷ ʐ̻ʷ]); Mandarin sh, zh, ch |
| [ʂ ʐ], [ṣ ẓ], etc.1 | hollow | postalveolar | apical | Ubykh; Abkhaz; Kumeyaay; Toda |
| [ʂ ʐ] | curled | palatal (or postalveolar?) | subapical | Toda |
^1 These sounds are usually just transcribed [ʂ ʐ]. Apical postalveolar and subapical palatal sibilants do not contrast in any language, but if necessary, apical postalveolar can be transcribed with an apical diacritic, as [s̠̺ z̠̺] or [ʂ̺ ʐ̺].
Whistled sibilants occur in speech pathology and may be caused by dental prostheses or orthodontics. However, they also occur phonemically in several southern Bantu languages, the best known being Shona. These have been variously described—as labialized but not velarized, as retroflex, etc., but none of these articulations are required for the sounds.[4] Using the Extended IPA, Shona sv and zv may be transcribed [s͎] and [z͎]. Other transcriptions seen include purely labial [s̫] and [z̫] (Ladefoged and Maddieson 1996) and labially co-articulated [s͡ɸ] and [z͡β].
Not including differences in manner of articulation or secondary articulation, some languages have as many as four different types of sibilants. For example, Northern Qiang and Southern Qiang have a four-way distinction among sibilant affricates /ts/ /tʂ/ /tʃ/ /tɕ/, with one for each of the four tongue shapes. Toda also has a four-way sibilant distinction, with one alveolar, one palato-alveolar, and two retroflex (apical postalveolar and subapical palatal).
The now-extinct Ubykh language is particularly complex, with a total of 27 sibilant consonants. Not only are all four tongue shapes represented (with the palato-alveolar appearing in the laminal "closed" variation), but both the palato-alveolars and alveolo-palatals can additionally appear labialized. On top of that, there is a five-way manner distinction among voiceless and voiced fricatives, voiceless and voiced affricates, and ejective affricates. (The three labialized palato-alveolar affricates are missing, which is why the total is 27 not 30.) The Bzyp dialect of the related Abkhaz language also has a similar inventory.
Some languages have four types when palatalization is considered. Polish is one example, with both palatalized and non-palatalized laminal denti-alveolars, laminal postalveolar (or "flat retroflex"), and alveolo-palatal ([s̪ z̪] [s̪ʲ z̪ʲ] [s̠ z̠] [ɕ ʑ]). Russian has the same surface contrasts, but the alveolo-palatals are arguably not phonemic. They only occur geminate, while the retroflex consonants never occur geminate, suggesting that both are allophones of the same phoneme.
Somewhat more common are languages with three sibilant types, including one hissing and two hushing. As with Polish and Russian, the two hushing types are usually postalveolar and alveolo-palatal, since these are the two most distinct from each other. Mandarin Chinese is an example of such a language. However, other possibilities exist. Serbo-Croatian has alveolar, palato-alveolar and alveolo-palatal affricates, while Basque has palato-alveolar and laminal and apical alveolar (apico-alveolar) fricatives and affricates. (Late Medieval peninsular Spanish and Portuguese had the same distinctions among fricatives.)
Extremely common are languages, such as English, with two sibilant types, one hissing and one hushing. A wide variety of languages across the world have this pattern. Perhaps most common is the pattern, as in English, with alveolar and palato-alveolar sibilants. Modern northern peninsular Spanish has a single apico-alveolar sibilant fricative [s̠], as well as a single palato-alveolar sibilant affricate [tʃ]. However, there are also languages with alveolar and apical retroflex sibilants (e.g. standard Vietnamese), and with alveolar and alveolo-palatal postalveolars (e.g. Japanese).
Few languages with sibilants are missing the hissing type, but they do exist. Middle Vietnamese is normally reconstructed with two sibilant fricatives, both hushing (one retroflex, one alveolo-palatal). Some languages have only a single hushing sibilant and no hissing sibilant, such as southern peninsular Spanish dialects of the "ceceo" type which have replaced the former hissing fricative with [θ], leaving only [tʃ].
Languages with no sibilants at all are fairly rare. Proto-Bantu is normally reconstructed with no sibilants (in fact, with no fricatives at all). The Polynesian languages Hawaiian and Rotokas likewise have no sibilants (along with extremely small overall consonant inventories). Most Australian languages lack fricatives and affricates entirely.
Authors including Chomsky and Halle group [f] and [v] as sibilants. However, they do not have the grooved articulation and high frequencies of other sibilants, and most phoneticians[5] continue to group them together with bilabial [ɸ], [β] and (inter)dental [θ], [ð] as non-sibilant anterior fricatives. For a grouping of sibilants and [f, v], the term strident is more common. Some researchers judge [f] to be non-strident in English, based on measurements of its comparative amplitude, but to be strident in other languages (for example, in the African language Ewe, where it contrasts with non-strident [ɸ]).
The nature of sibilants as so-called 'obstacle fricatives' is complicated – there is a continuum of possibilities relating to the angle at which the jet of air may strike an obstacle. The grooving often considered necessary for classification as a sibilant has been observed in ultrasound studies of the tongue for supposedly non-sibilant [θ] voiceless alveolar non-sibilant fricative.[6]