Editing Fortis and lenis (section)

== Characteristics ==

=== Articulatory strength ===
Later studies have shown that articulatory strength is not completely irrelevant.  The articulators in the mouth can move with a greater velocity<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Smith|McLean-Muse|1987}}</ref> and/or with higher [[electromyography|electromyographic]] activation levels of the relevant articulatory muscles<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Slis|1971}}</ref> with fortis consonants than with lenis ones.

==== Oral pressure ====
Generally, voiceless stops have greater oral pressure than voiced ones, which could explain this greater articulatory energy.   In [[Ewe language|Ewe]], for example, the lips reach closure faster in articulating {{IPA|/p/}} than in {{IPA|/b/}}, making the lip closure longer.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=95}}</ref>  These differences in oral articulatory energy in consonants of different laryngeal settings is fairly widespread, though the correlation of energy and voicing is not universal.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=96}}</ref> Indeed, a number of languages have been proposed as making strength differences independently of voicing, such as [[Tabasaran language|Tabasaran]], [[Archi language|Archi]], [[Udi language|Udi]], and [[Aghul language|Aghul]].<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Kodzasov|1977|p=228}}</ref><ref>[http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/caucasus/nekklaut.htm#XFN10 Consonant Systems of the Northeast Caucasian Languages on TITUS DIDACTICA]</ref>

==== Subglottal pressure ====
It is rare for the use of greater ''respiratory'' energy for [[segment (linguistics)|segments]] to occur in a language, though some examples do exist, such as [[Korean language|Korean]], which makes a three way contrast amongst most of its obstruents with voiceless, [[aspirated consonant|aspirated]], and a third [[faucalized voice]]d set that involves both an increase in subglottal pressure as well as greater glottal constriction and tenseness in the walls of the vocal tract.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=95}}</ref>  [[Igbo language|Igbo]] has also been observed to utilize an increase in subglottal pressure involving its aspirated consonants.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=95}}</ref>

=== Consonant length ===
"Fortis" and "lenis" have also been used to refer to contrasts of consonant duration in languages like [[Jawoyn language|Jawoyn]],<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Jaeger|1983}}, cited in {{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=98}}</ref> [[Ojibwe language|Ojibwe]],<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|p=98}}</ref> [[Dalabon language|Dalabon]], [[Kunwinjku language|Kunwinjku]],<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Fletcher|Evans|2002|p=124}}</ref> and [[Zurich German]].<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Fleischer|Schmid|2006|p=244}}</ref> The [[Zapotec languages]] are also considered to have contrast of length rather than of voicing.<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Nellis|Hollenbach|1980}}, cited in {{Harvcoltxt|Merrill|2008}}</ref>  For example, in [[Mixe languages|Mixe]], lenis consonants are not only pronounced shorter than their fortis counterparts, but they are also prone to voicing in voiced environments, which fortis consonants are not.

This association with longer duration has prompted some to propose a diachronic link between fortis consonants and [[gemination]].<ref>e.g. {{Harvcoltxt|Swadesh|1947}} and {{Harvcoltxt|Blevins|2004}}.</ref> {{Harvcoltxt|Payne|2006}} even proposes that gemination is itself a process of fortition in [[Italian language|Italian]].

Many [[North Caucasian languages]] ([[Northwest Caucasian languages|Northwest]] and especially [[Northeast Caucasian languages|Northeast]]) have a consonantal distinction described as "strong" or "preruptive" that has concomitant length. [[Akhvakh language|Akhvakh]] and other Northeast Caucasian languages even possess a distinction between strong/long and weak/short [[ejective consonant]]s: {{IPA|[qʼaː]}} ('soup') vs. {{IPA|[qʼːama]}} ('cock's comb')

=== Relationship between strength and length ===
{{Harvcoltxt|Kodzasov|1977}} describes the fortis consonants for [[Archi language|Archi]]: 
{{blockquote|Strong phonemes are characterized by the intensiveness (tension) of the articulation. The intensity of the pronunciation leads to a natural lengthening of the duration of the sound, and that is why strong [consonants] differ from weak ones by greater length. [However,] the adjoining of two single weak sounds does not produce a strong one [...] Thus, the gemination of a sound does not by itself create its tension.<ref>translated in {{Harvcoltxt|Ladefoged|Maddieson|1996|pp=97–98}}</ref>}}

Fortis stops in [[Australian Aboriginal languages]] such as [[Rembarunga language|Rembarunga]] (see [[Ngalakgan language|Ngalakgan]]) also involve length, with short consonants having weak contact and intermittent voicing, and long consonants having full closure, a more powerful release burst, and no voicing. It is not clear if strength makes the consonants long, or if during long consonants there is a greater opportunity for full articulation.

=== Enforcement of phonemic distinctions ===
Articulatory strength can reinforce other distinctions. [[Ewe language|Ewe]], for example, which contrasts a [[voiceless bilabial fricative]] {{IPA|/ɸ/}} and a [[voiceless labiodental fricative]] {{IPA|/f/}}, pronounces the latter markedly more strongly than {{IPA|/f/}} in most languages.{{citation needed|date=December 2009}} This helps differentiate what would otherwise be a very subtle distinction.

In English, use of the terms "fortis" and "lenis" is useful to refer to contrasts between consonants that have different phonetic attributes depending on context. The [[alveolar consonant]]s {{IPA|/t/}} and {{IPA|/d/}}, for example:
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
|+ [[Allophone]]s of American English {{IPA|/t/}} and {{IPA|/d/}}<ref>{{Harvcoltxt|Silverman|2004|p=71}}</ref>
! colspan="2"  rowspan="2" |
! colspan="3" |lenis
! colspan="3" |fortis
|-
! form
! colspan="2" |example
! form
! colspan="2" |example
|-
! colspan="2" |Word-initial
| rowspan=4| {{IPA|[d̥]}} || {{IPA|[ˈd̥ɑ̆k̚]}} ||dock|| {{IPA|[tʰ]}} || {{IPA|[ˈtʰɑ̆p̚]}} || top
|-
! colspan="2"  rowspan="3" | Syllable-final
|rowspan="3" | {{IPA|[ˈnɑd̥]}} ||rowspan="3" |nod || {{IPA|[V̆t̚]}} || {{IPA|[ˈnɑ̆t̚]}}|| rowspan="3" | knot
|-
| {{IPA|[V̆ˀt̚]}} || {{IPA|[ˈnɑ̆ˀt̚]}}
|-
| {{IPA|[V̆ʔ]}} || {{IPA|[ˈnɑ̆ʔ]}}
|-
! colspan="2" | Stressed syllable-initial
| {{IPA|[d]}} || {{IPA|[əˈdɑ̆pt]}} || adopt || {{IPA|[tʰ]}} || {{IPA|[əˈtʰɑ̆p̚]}} || atop
|-
! colspan="2"  rowspan="2" | Word-internal unstressed	
| {{IPA|[Vɾ]}} || {{IPA|[ˈɑɾɹ̩]}}{{ref label|flapping|a|}} || rowspan="2" |odder || rowspan="2" | {{IPA|[V̆ɾ]}}|| rowspan="2" | {{IPA|[ˈɑ̆ɾɹ̩]}} || rowspan="2" |otter
|-
| {{IPA|[V̆ɾ]}} || {{IPA|[ˈɑ̆ɾɹ̩]}}
|-
! colspan="2" | Following {{IPA|[s]}}{{ref label|s|b|}}
| || || || {{IPA|[t]}} || {{IPA|[ˈstɑ̆p̚]}} || stop
|} 
:{{note|flapping|a}} Depending on dialect, {{IPA|/t/}} and {{IPA|/d/}} may not neutralize with [[flapping]], with the contrast manifesting itself in the preceding vowel's duration.
:{{note|s|b}} In the same syllable, the distinction between {{IPA|/t/}} and {{IPA|/d/}} is lost after {{IPA|[s]}}.

As the above table shows, no one feature is adequate to accurately reflect the contrasts in all contexts. Word-initially, the contrast has more to do with aspiration; {{IPA|/t/}} is aspirated and {{IPA|/d/}} is an unaspirated voiceless stop.  In the syllable coda, however, {{IPA|/t/}} is instead pronounced with [[glottalization]], unrelease, and a shorter vowel while {{IPA|/d/}} remains voiceless. In this way, the terms ''fortis'' and ''lenis'' are convenient in discussing English phonology, even if they are phonetically imprecise.

In southern German dialects, the actual distinction underlying obstruent pairs varies somewhat depending on the dialect, but is often one of length—fortis sounds are pronounced geminated in all positions in a word, even at the end of a word or before other consonants.