Re: compactness of consonants

Jakobson's compact/diffuse distinction is problematic when applied to
consonants. It is usually claimed that high vowels, as well as
consonants articulated at or in front of the alveolar ridge are to be
regarded as "diffuse", while low vowels as well as consonants
articulated behind the alveolar ridge (including palatals and velars)
are to be regarded as "compact". However, there is no convincing
evidence that "compact" and "diffuse" sounds form natural classes in
phonology (the grave/acute distinction fares better in this respect):
it is quite counterintuitive to group, say, [k] and [c] with [a] as
opposed to [i] and [u]; and classificatory economy is scarcely an
great gain if naturalness has to be sacrificed. Then, of course,
there is this coarticulation effect you mention -- it is indeed the
dynamics of CV or VC transitions (rather than the value of F2-F1,
which is affected quite strongly by vowel colouring), that is more
important for consonant recognition.

My impression is that nowadays few phonologists attach any importance
to compact/diffuse as a consonantal feature.

--- In cybalist@..., "Sergejus Tarasovas" <S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
> This question was first posted on phoNet, but as it seems there
> nothing happens on this list, I re-post here. Sorry for possible OT.
>
> 1. Some of my sources state palatals and velars are compact
> consonants. Others - that while labials and dentals (and
> postalveolars?) are diffuse, the compactness/diffuseness opposition
> is just not applicable to palatals and velars. Where is the truth?
>
> 2. One of my sources implicitly states that plosives can be
> classified in terms of compactness/diffuseness (and
> graveness/acuteness, respectively). But the spectrograms I've seen
> show the following: for, eg, [bV], [dV] and [gV], we have f1 in the
> form
> _____
> /
> , and f2 in the form \_____ for, eg, [ba], _ ___ for [da] and
>
> _____
> /
>
> for [ga], on the one hand, and
> _____
> / for [bi], _ _____ for [di] and \____ for [gi] on the other,
> horizontal line representing f2 for the vowel. As I can see, the
> frequencies of the first two formants of plosives depend on ones of
> syllabic component, being more close ('compact') or distant
> ('diffuse') depending on the appropriate characteristic of the
vowel
> segment. It's the fequency transition as such and it's direction
> (different for different syllabic segments!) that makes the
> difference. I am confused. Would anybody help me?
>
> Sergei