In:The Sounds of New Orleans: A sociophonetic study
Dana Serditova
[Varieties of English Around the World G74] 2026
► pp. xi–xiv
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
List of figures
Figure 1.Floor plan of a shotgun house
Figure 2.A map of New Orleans neighborhoods where the participants in this study
come from (with the exception of Algiers and Metairie)
Figure 3.An overview of /l/-vocalization studies
in the United States
in the United States
Figure 4.Total count of /l/-vocalization for the preceding phonological
environment, New Orleans (left),
Chalmette (right). 1 — vocalized. 0 — not vocalized
Chalmette (right). 1 — vocalized. 0 — not vocalized
Figure 5.Predicted probabilities of /l/-vocalization based
on the preceding phonological environment,
New Orleans sample
on the preceding phonological environment,
New Orleans sample
Figure 6.Total count of /l/-vocalization for the following phonological
environment, New Orleans (left),
Chalmette (right). 1 — vocalized. 0 — not vocalized
Chalmette (right). 1 — vocalized. 0 — not vocalized
Figure 7.Predicted probabilities of /l/-vocalization based on the following
phonological environment, New Orleans sample
Figure 8.Predicted probabilities of /l/-vocalization based on the following
phonological environment, Chalmette sample
Figure 9.Percentage of /l/-vocalization by ethnicity
and preceding segment
and preceding segment
Figure 10.Percentage of /l/-vocalization by ethnicity
and following segment
and following segment
Figure 11.Predicted probabilities of /l/-vocalization based
on ethnicity, New Orleans sample
on ethnicity, New Orleans sample
Figure 12.Predicted probabilities of /l/-vocalization based on age, New Orleans
sample
Figure 13.Percentage of /l/-vocalization by speaker, New Orleans and Chalmette
samples
Figure 14.The /ɪ/ and /ɛ/ merger in New Orleans. A general overview (box
plot)
Figure 15.The /ɪ/ and /ɛ/ merger in New Orleans. A general overview
(scatterplot)
Figure 16.The /ɪ/ and /ɛ/ merger in New Orleans. Manner of articulation for the
following consonant
Figure 17.Scatterplot of Bhattacharyya scores by age for the PIN~PEN merger before
nasals. Combined datasets
Figure 18.Predicted Bhattacharyya’s Affinity scores based on speaker age. Top left:
New Orleans dataset. Top right: Chalmette dataset. Below: combined datasets.
Age groups: left (1): 18–39, middle (2): 40–59, right (3): 60+
Figure 19.Predicted Bhattacharyya’s Affinity scores based on ethnoracial
affiliation
Figure 20.Scatterplot of Bhattacharyya’s Affinity scores based on ethnoracial
affiliation. New Orleans sample
Figure 21.Predicted Bhattacharyya’s Affinity scores based on education and
ethnicity
Figure 22.Predicted Bhattacharyya’s Affinity scores based
on education
on education
Figure 23.Scatterplot of Bhattacharyya’s Affinity based
on gender, nasals
on gender, nasals
Figure 24.Predictions plot representing the effects of gender and age on
Bhattacharyya scores in the pre-nasal environment
Figure 25.Predicted F2 values by manner of articulation
Figure 26.Predicted F1 values by manner of articulation
Figure 27.Predicted F2 values by place of articulation
Figure 28.Mean predicted values of F1 and F2 depending on phonological
environment
Figure 29.Average Trajectory Length per speaker gender,
New Orleans dataset
New Orleans dataset
Figure 30.Average Trajectory Length per speaker gender,
New Orleans dataset
New Orleans dataset
Figure 31.Scatterplot of Average Trajectory Length by speaker age
Figure 32.Predicted Trajectory Length by age
Figure 33.Predicted Trajectory Length by manner of articulation. “Central” refers
to the /r/ environment
Figure 34.Predicted Trajectory Length by place of articulation
Figure 35.Predicted Trajectory Length by voicing
Figure 36.Predicted Trajectory Length by context
Figure 37./aɪ/-monophthongization and duration:
A general overview
A general overview
Figure 38.Interaction of duration and place of articulation
Figure 39.Interaction of duration and manner of articulation
Figure 40.Predicted Trajectory Length by location
Figure 41.Average Trajectory Length per speaker,
New Orleans dataset
New Orleans dataset
Figure 42.Average Trajectory Length per speaker,
Chalmatian dataset
Chalmatian dataset
Figure 43.Formant Trajectory of an older Black female speaker, vowel space
Figure 44.Formant Trajectory of an older Black female speaker, separated
Figure 45.Formant Trajectory of an older Creole male speaker,
vowel space
vowel space
Figure 46.Formant Trajectory of the older Creole male speaker, separated
Figure 47.Formant Trajectory of a young White male speaker,
vowel space
vowel space
Figure 48.Formant Trajectory of the young White male speaker, separated
Figure 49.(a) Formant Trajectory of a middle-aged Black speaker, vowel space. (b)
Formant Trajectory of an older White speaker, vowel space. (c) Formant
Trajectory of an older White speaker, separated. (d) Formant Trajectory of a
middle-aged Black speaker, separated
