Talk:Voice onset time

message: What is "S. Japanese" in the "Relative VOT distinctions in various languages" table? It is not defined anywhere in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.61.45 (talk) 01:20, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: S. Japanese

message: A greeting to all.
I find is interesting to consider also the prenasalized stops like a step in the continuun of the VOT. But this is not part of the ŏpīnĭō cŏmmūnĭs on the VOT. Unfortunately, Cho–Ladefoged [1997] does not speak of it, and not even Ladefoged–Maddieson [1996]. I would want to deepen the situation of the Japanese dialects and the allophonic/tassophonic alternation of prenasalized and modal voiced stops in Melanesian languages.
Anybody knows some bibliographical reference in purpose? (Anticipated thanks)--Glottografo 00:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any References for VOT in Prenasalized Stops? 

message: "Such full voicing is not the limit of negative VOT. A voicing duration greater than the length of the plosive may manifests [sic] itself as prenasalization."
The term "prenasalization", when I look for it in phonetics books, is not discussed as part of the voicing continuum, but as a phonetic quality of some stops in some languages. The only discussions of prenasalization as part of the voicing continuum I can find are on Wikipedia itself. Could whoever wrote this paragraph please give more details on his sources? Otherwise I think this part of the discussion should be removed. 
A similar issue is present with the later part of the same paragraph. Implosives have a different kind of voicing (non-pulmonic), not a different strength of voicing (reading the Wikipedia article on implosives makes this clear, as do most phonetics books). I believe this should also be removed unless the writer can provide a source.
Armchairlinguist 20:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed this because no one has come forward to claim that it is accurate, and give supporting evidence for it. --Armchairlinguist 18:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prenasalized != prevoiced, implosive != stronger voicing 

message: Could there be included an example of where the voice onset occurs on an actual spectrogram? It is giving me trouble especially since I cannot figure out where on a spectrogram of speech that the VOT occurs. Ryoga-2003 (talk) 08:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone has Praat or multispeech (actually, I think I have Praat somewhere, but I don't think I have it installed right), it's easy to make your own and upload an image of it.  If it's from multispeech it would probably have to be Fair Use, since it's made using proprietary software; it might be free use if it's made in praat. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  spectrogram example 

message: Admittedly I only have a small sample, but as far as I can think, I've only ever seen the former (without a hyphen), not the latter (with a hyphen). This is the case in both textbooks:
*Ladefoged (2006). A Course in Phonetics.
*Reetz & Jongman (2009). Phonetics.
and contemporary journal articles:
*Benki (2001), Journal of Phonetics
*Francis et al. (2006), JASA
This is just a quick search, I'm sure we can look at more stuff. I'm not trying to say that it is never written with a hyphen (I'm sure it is), just that my intuition is the form without a hyphen is far more common. rʨanaɢ (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. In IPA papers, "voice onset time" prevails against "voice-onset time" by a margin of 9 to 1. Same with ASA. Nardog (talk) 10:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Voice onset time" or "Voice-onset time"