Glottalic airstream in English

While the glottalic airstream is not generally considered part of English phonology, I've noticed several uses of it in my speech.

1. T-glottaling: I don't know if this should really count, but /t/ before nasals becomes [?]. Also /t/ and /d/ in utterance-final position are usually glottal stops.
2. Pre-glottalization: syllable-final stops are often preceeded by a glottal stop. I haven't figured out the rules around this yet.
3. Initial /kw/ seems to be ejective for me.
4. Voiced stops are sometimes implosive when emphasized.

Are these common? Where do they occur?

>>1. T-glottaling: I don't know if this should really count, but /t/ before nasals becomes [?]. Also /t/ and /d/ in utterance-final position are usually glottal stops.<<

It is very common in English dialects to realize /t/ codas as [?] (this most commonly shows up word-finally, but there are other positions in which such may show up due to restrictions upon clusters allowed in codas); it is also usual in North American English dialects to realize /t/ before what would be realized as [n=] as [?] as well. Additionally, in some English English dialects /t/ is commonly realized as [?] intervocalically before unstressed vowels. On the other hand, I have never heard of /d/ being realized as [?] in any English dialect at

>>2. Pre-glottalization: syllable-final stops are often preceeded by a glottal stop. I haven't figured out the rules around this yet.<<

This does show up in at least some English dialects, such as my own. In the case of my own dialect, the rule is simply that any fortis plosive that is in a coda following a vowel is glottalized (beside /t/ being realized as [?] or, if followed in a following word by a vowel, as [4] - or simply being elided outright), which can be thought of as being preceded by a glottal stop. Note that in my dialect this is distinguishing between fortis plosives and devoiced lenis plosives, which do not have such glottalization.

I think the final /d/ might actually just be unreleased. Do you have an ejective for /kw/ or an implosive for /b/?

<<Do you have an ejective for /kw/>>

I don't think so. Do you have reduction of /kw/ to /k/ in certain places. I have that with results such as:

"quart" /kort/
"quarter" /kort@`/
"quartet" /kortEt/
"sequoia" /s@kOI@/

>>I think the final /d/ might actually just be unreleased.<<

This is *very* common in English dialects. In my own dialect, though, it does not seem to be quite as common as in most English dialects, and in utterance-final position and before (even very short) pauses I often devoice final /d/.

>>Do you have an ejective for /kw/ or an implosive for /b/?<<

No, I have neither of these in my dialect.

>>I don't think so. Do you have reduction of /kw/ to /k/ in certain places. I have that with results such as:

"quart" /kort/
"quarter" /kort@`/
"quartet" /kortEt/<<

These are not instances of reduction of /kw/, but rather of coexisting pronunciations with /k/ and /kw/. In this case, I am not sure which pronunciation is more conservative, as the /kw/ pronunciation could very well be a spelling pronunciation from what I know.

>>"sequoia" /s@kOI@/ <<

I have never heard of this having /kw/ in any English dialect myself.