This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

This article adds nuanced findings to the previous generalization that high sonority of the vowel explains its more frequent use in warmer climates. The authors find that “speakers in warm-climate languages make more use of the so-called “sonorant” consonants, that is, consonants with some of the qualities of vowels” (123).

This article presents a reanalysis of a previous study on language rhythm and consonant-vowel syllables by Ember and Ember (2000). Communicative efficiency, climate, baby-holding, literacy, and mean number of syllables per word were all considered as factors in consonant-vowel syllable use.

This article focuses on environmental and social explainations for variations in sonority. As expected, results suggest that climate, vegetation density, and sexuality are associated with sonority.

This article focuses on environmental and social explainations for variations in sonority. As expected, results suggest that climate, vegetation density, and sexuality are associated with sonority.

This article focuses on environmental and social explainations for variations in sonority. As expected, results suggest that climate, vegetation density, and sexuality are associated with sonority.

This article is a response to Munroe, Fought, and Fought's comments on a previous study of sonority and climate. Authors suggest that the three indices used by Munroe, Fought, and Fought to measure sonority are not the same contruct and present new results that indicate an association between climate, topography, and vowel index.

This article is a response to Munroe, Fought, and Fought's comments on a previous study of sonority and climate. Authors suggest that the three indices used by Munroe, Fought, and Fought to measure sonority are not the same contruct and present new results that indicate an association between climate, topography, and vowel index.

This article focuses on environmental and social explainations for variations in sonority. As expected, results suggest that climate, vegetation density, and sexuality are associated with sonority.