AUC Philologica (Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philologica) is an academic journal published by Charles University. It publishes scholarly articles in a large number of disciplines (English, German, Greek and Latin, Oriental, Romance and Slavonic studies, as well as in phonetics and translation studies), both on linguistic and on literary and cultural topics. Apart from articles it publishes reviews of new academic books or special issues of academic journals.

The journal is indexed in CEEOL, DOAJ, EBSCO, and ERIH PLUS.

AUC PHILOLOGICA, Vol 2019 No 2 (2019), 77–95

Spectral and temporal characteristics of Czech vowels in spontaneous speech

[Spectral and temporal characteristics of Czech vowels in spontaneous speech]

Nikola Paillereau, Kateřina Chládková

published online: 18. 10. 2019


This paper provides a comprehensive account of spectral and durational characteristics of Czech monophthongal vowels. It improves on the existing literature (that almost exclusively focused on read speech) in that it examines vowels in spontaneous speech recorded from 10 men and 10 women, who were recruited from the general population not restricted to students or media reporters (which were the populations used in previous studies). The present material thus represents a relatively naturalistic data set. The acoustical analyses of vowel spectral properties are not limited to only the first and the second formant (F1 and F2) but include also higher formants. Duration normalized for word length as well as long/short duration ratios are compared across all vowel qualities. In line with previous acoustic data on Czech high front vowels, the present results confirm that the phonologically short /ɪ/ is realized with a higher F1 than the phonologically long /iː/. The results further demonstrate that the mid front /ɛ/ and /ɛː/ are realized with a relatively high F1 and are numerically even closer to the low /a/ and /aː/ than to the other mid vowel quality, the back /o/ and /oː/. A novel finding is that short back vowels /o/ and /u/ have a higher F2 than their long counterparts: this slight fronting is likely attributable to the spontaneous style of speech as well as to the mostly coronal context in which the vowels were embedded. In contrary to recent literature that reported extremely low long/short ratios in high vowels our findings show that duration marks the phonological length distinctions consistently across all five vowel pairs: long vowels are on average 1.76 times longer than short vowels. The study concludes with a discussion of the implications that the vowel acoustic properties may have on the way the Czech vocalic system is transcribed.

keywords: vowels; Czech; vowel formants; vowel duration; spontaneous speech; phonological transcription

references (60)

1. Borovičková, B. & Maláč, V. (1967). The Spectral Analysis of Czech Sound Combinations. Praha: Academia.

2. Beneš, J. (1943). Porušování základní barvy českých samohlásek. Naše řeč, 27(3), 64-65.

3. Bičan, A. (2013). Phonotactics of Czech. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. CrossRef

4. Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Version 6.0.40. Retrieved from

5. Cervera, T., Miralles, J. L. & Gonzalez-Alvarez, J. (2001). Acoustical analysis of Spanish vowels produced by laryngectomized subjects. J. Speech Lang. Hearing Res., 44, 988-996. CrossRef

6. Chládková, K., Boersma, P. & Podlipský, V. J. (2009). Online formant shifting as a function of F0. Proceedings of Interspeech 2009, 464-467.

7. Chládková, K., Escudero, P. & Boersma, P. (2011). Context-specific acoustic differences between Peruvian and Iberian Spanish vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 416-428. CrossRef

8. Chládková, K., Černá, M., Paillereau, N., Skarnitzl, R. & Oceláková, Z. (2019). Prenatal infant-directed speech: vowels and voice quality. Proceedings of ICPhS 2019.

9. Chlumský, J. (1928). Česká kvantita, melodie a přízvuk. Praha: Česká akademie věd a umění.

10. Crothers, J. (1978). Typology and universals of vowel systems. In: J. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson & E. A. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of Human Language, Vol. 2. Standford: Standford University Press.

11. Cruttenden, A. (2014). Gimson's Pronunciation of English. London and New York: Routledge. CrossRef

12. Dankovičová, J. (1997). Czech. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 27, 77-80. CrossRef

13. Duběda T. (2005). Jazyky a jejich zvuky: univerzálie a typologie ve fonetice a fonologii. Praha: Karolinum.

14. Duchet, J. L. (1992). La Phonologie. Paris: P.U.F.

15. Escudero, P., Boersma, P., Rauber, A. S. & Bion, R. A. H. (2009). A cross-dialect acoustic description of vowels: Brazilian and European Portuguese. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126, 1379-1393. CrossRef

16. Fant, G. (1960). The Acoustic Theory of Speech Production. The Hague: Mouton.

17. Fant, G. (1969). Formant frequencies of Swedish vowels. In: Speech Transmission Laboratory, Quarterly Progress and Status Report 3 (pp. 94-99). Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology.

18. Frinta, A. (1909). Novočeská výslovnost: pokus o soustavnou fonetiku jazyka českého. Praha: Česká akademie císaře Františka Josefa pro vědy, slovesnost a umění.

19. Frinta, A. (1925). A Czech phonetic reader. London: University of London Press.

20. Flemming, E. (2019). Implications of [i] vowels for the theory of vowel inventories. Presented at LSA Annual Meeting, NYC.

21. Fox, R. A., Flege, J. E. & Munro, M. J. (1995). The perception of English and Spanish vowels by native English and Spanish listeners: A multidimensional scaling analysis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 2540-2550. CrossRef

22. Gendrot, C., Adda-Decker, M. & Vaissière, J. (2008). Les voyelles /i/ et /y/ du français: focalisation et variations formantiques. In: Proceedings of JEP, 205-208.

23. Grammont, M. (1933). Traité pratique de prononciation française. Paris: Delagrave.

24. Hála, B. (1941). Akustická podstata samohlásek. Praha: Česká akademie věd a umění.

25. Hála, B. (1955). Výslovnost spisovné češtiny: její zásady a pravidla. Praha: Nakladatelství Československé Akademie Věd.

26. Hála, B. (1962). Uvedení do fonetiky češtiny na obecně fonetickém základě. Praha: ČSAV.

27. Hirata, Y. & Tsukada, K. (2009). Effects of speaking rate and vowel length on formant frequency displacement in Japanese. Phonetica, 66, 129-149. CrossRef

28. Hirayama, M. (2003). Contrast in Japanese vowels. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 20, 115-132.

29. Jones, D. (1932). An Outline of English Phonetics. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.

30. Jones, L. G. (1953). The vowels of English and Russian: An acoustic comparison. Word, 9(4), 354-361. CrossRef

31. Kamiyama, T. & Vaissière, J. (2009). Perception and production of French close and close-mid rounded vowels by Japanese-speaking learners. Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère Aile... Lia, 2, 9-41.

32. Kamiyama, T. (2011). Pronunciation of French vowels by Japanese speakers learning French as a foreign language: Back and front rounded vowels /u y ø/. Phonological Studies: Phonological Society of Japan, 97-108.

33. Kewley-Port, D. (1995). Thresholds for formant frequency discrimination of vowels in consonantal context. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97(5), 3139-3146. CrossRef

34. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B. & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1-26. CrossRef

35. Ladefoged, P. & Broadbent, D. E. (1957). Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 29, 98-104. CrossRef

36. Lambacher, S. G., Martens, W. L., Kakehi, K., Marasinghe, C. A. & Molholt, G. (2005). The effects of identification training on the identification and production of American English vowels by native speakers of Japanese. Appl. Psycholinguist., 26, 227-247. CrossRef

37. Lengeris, A. & Hazan, V. (2010). The effect of native vowel processing ability and frequency discrimination acuity on the phonetic training of English vowels for native speakers of Greek. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 128(6), 3757-3768. CrossRef

38. Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P. & Herve, M. (2018). Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.2.4. Retrieved from

39. Liljencrants, J. & Lindblom, B. (1972). Numerical simulation of vowel quality systems: The role of perceptual contrast. Language, 48, 839-862. CrossRef

40. Ludvíková, M. & Kraus, J. (1966). Kvantitativní vlastnosti soustavy českých fonémů. Slovo a slovesnost, 27, 334-344.

41. Lyakso, E., Frolova, O. & Grigorev, A. (2009). The acoustic characteristics of Russian vowels in children of 6 and 7 years of age. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2009, 1739-1742.

42. Nicolaidis, K. (2003). Acoustic variability of vowels in Greek spontaneous speech. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 3221-3224.

43. Niimi, S., Kumada, M. & Niitsu, M. (1994). Functions of tongue-related muscles during production of the five Japanese vowels. Ann. Bull. R. I. L. P. Univ. Tokyo, 28, 33-40.

44. Padgett, J. (2004). Russian vowel reduction and dispersion theory. Phonological Studies, 7, 81-96.

45. Paillereau, N. (2016). 'Identical' vowels in L1 and L2? Criteria and implications for L2 phonetic teaching and learning. In: Liszka, S. A., Leclercq, P., Tellier, M. & Daniel, G. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 2016 (pp. 144-178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossRef

46. Paillereau, N. & Skarnitzl, R. (in press). An acoustic-perceptual study on Czech monophthongs. In: P. Kosta & T. Radeva-Bork (Eds.), Current developments in Slavic Linguistics. Twenty years after. Bern: Peter Lang.

47. Palková, Z. (1997). Fonetika a fonologie češtiny. Praha: Karolinum.

48. Palmer, H. E. (1920). A First Course of English Phonetics. Cambridge: W. Heffer and Sons Ltd.

49. Podlipský, V. J., Skarnitzl, R. & Volín, J. (2009). High front vowels in Czech: A contrast in quantity or quality? In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2009, 132-135.

50. Podlipský, V. J., Chládková, K. & Šimáčková, Š. (under review). Spectrum as a perceptual cue to vowel length in Czech, a quantity language.

51. R Development Core Team (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from

52. Skarnitzl, R. & Volín, J. (2012). Referenční hodnoty vokalických formantů pro mladé dospělé mluvčí standardní češtiny. Akustické listy, 18, 7-11.

53. Skarnitzl, R. (2012). Dvojí i v české výslovnosti. Naše řeč, 95, 141-153.

54. Skarnitzl, R., Šturm, P. & Volín, J. (2016). Zvuková báze řečové komunikace: fonetický a fonologický popis řeči. Praha: Karolinum.

55. Stevens, K. N. & House, A. S. (1963). Perturbations of vowel articulations by consonantal context: an acoustical study. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 6, 111-128. CrossRef

56. Šimáčková, Š., Podlipský, V. J. & Chládková, K. (2012). Czech spoken in Bohemia and Moravia. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 42, 225-232. CrossRef

57. Vaissière, J. (2009). Articulatory modeling and the definition of acoustic-perceptual targets for reference vowels. The Chineses Phonetics Journal, 2, 22-33.

58. Vaissière, J. (2011). On the acoustic and perceptual characterization of reference vowels in a cross-language perspective. In: Proceedings of 17th ICPhS XVII.

59. Wells, J. (2001). IPA transcription systems for English. Retrieved from (last accessed on May 16, 2019)

60. <bez popisu>

Creative Commons License
Spectral and temporal characteristics of Czech vowels in spontaneous speech is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

periodicity: 4 x per year
print price: 150 czk
ISSN: 0567-8269
E-ISSN: 2464-6830