Sonderdrucke aus der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg

PETER AUER

A note on in natural phonology

Originalbeitrag erschienen in: Julian Mendez Dosuma (Hrsg.): Naturalists at Krems: papers from the Workshop on Natural Phonology and Natural Morphology, (Krems, 1 - 7 July 1988). Salamanca: Ed. Univ. de Salamanca, 1990, S. 11-22 A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology

Peter Auer

. Naturalness in Phonology: articulation/perception or cognition?

The last 15 years have brought about dramatic changes in (Generative) Phonology; We have witnessed the times of segmental Generative Phonology coming to an end. Radically new conceptions of Phonology have developed. Instead of taking the input and output of Phonology as strings of linearly ordered segments, as it was the case in classical Generative Phonology, phonological units are now assumed to display an internal hierarchical organization; from year to year, the complexity of this internal organization seems to increase, and new research paradigms such as Autosegmental Phonology, , Prosodic Phonology, Dependency Phonology have developed and worked on phonological representations and models that have little to do with, say, SPE phonology. All of these new approaches make use of the theoretical insight that phonological data should be spread onto a number of levels or "tiers") This non-linear approach has made it possible to analyze suprasegmental phenomena, which by their very nature, spread beyond single phonological segments (such as , , st0d, musical and pitch accent); in addition, phenomena hitherto considered to be in the realm of the turned out to be analyzable in a much more explanative way, when looked upon in the new paradigm - phenomena such as compensatory lengthening or assimilation. Indeed, the very nature of the phonological segment itself, which was long taken to consist of a bundle of features (a "matrix"), is today open to discussion and becomes gradually replaced by a hierarchical structure of features.

1 The idea is, of course, not as revolutionary as that if we take phonology as a whole; Firthian phonology was based on the same idea, and pre-structuralist phonologists of course always took into account prosodic features in explaining, for example, the development of the Germanic unaccented . However, it was a revolutionary idea within generative phonology of the 'classical' kind.

12 Peter Auer

The new trend in Generative Phonology has brought back a number of ideas and concepts from pre-generative, even pre-structuralist times, and it may not be exaggerating to see as one of its main assets, a new found tradition in phonology: Natural Phonology (NP), flourishing in the early seventies, has at least according to some (possibly) unbiased onlookers such as Bertinetto (1985: 581), played an important, though indirect role in bringing about the change from segmental to non- linear phonology, by insisting on the deficiencies of the SPE type of Generative Phonology and by bringing the back into Phonology. It is all the more surprising that NP has profited very little from the progress that has been made since, and has had little to contribute to it. Instead, it is still restricted (with no exception. to my knowledge) to linear segmental analysis! Writers in the NP framework continue to cling to the "teleologies" of fortition and lenition as an overall and comprehensive explanation of phonological processes. Fortition (strengthening) and lenition (weakening), in turn, are understood as processes which enhance the perception or facilitate the articulation of particular segments (sounds). Both are intimately bound to the physiology of the speech and hearing organs. Other natural explanations for phonological phenomena than those that can be stated in terms of articulation (and. occasionally) perception, have played only a minor role. In fact, some authors seem to equate natural rules with processes that have their basis in the articulation system.' There is no theoretical reason why this should be so. Indeed, Stampe himself is much more dialectical on that point (although obviously arguing against the then up-to- date generative framework and not interested in prosody). He states his opinion somewhat paradoxically: processes are mental operations for him, not just peripheral; but these mental processes must have a "physical" phonetic basis;

"It should not be supposed from this that processes are peripheral, physical events - merely the result of articulatory mistimings or of over- or under-shootings of articulatory targets. [...] Anticipatory substitutions, in particular, suggest that the substitutions occur in the central nervous system - i.e., that they are mental substitutions. The very suppressibility of processes argues for their mental nature. [...) But although processes are mental substitutions, they are substitutions which respond to physical phonetic difficulties." (Donegan & Stampe 1979: 136) Or, in the same line: "Although phonological substitution is a mental operation, it is clearly motivated by the physical character of speech - its neurophysiological, morphological, mechanical, temporal, and acoustic properties." (Stampe 1979: 6)

2 Cf. Vennemann (1986). The few overview texts on NP do not mention prosody at all (Edwards & Shriberg 1983, Donegan & Stampe 1979, Dressler 1984). A passing remark can be found in Hurch (1988:18). 4 E.g., Hutcheson (1973: 1 f) equates natural processes with "ease of articulation" and Grammont's law "du moindre effort", Ralph (1981: 343) calls "natural rules" those that "are easily accounted for and formulated on the basis of substantive properties of the articulatory apparatus". and according to Wojcik (1981: 635) "the function of processes is to facilitate and/or clarify pronunciation", and "all processes have a teleology which stems precisely from this need to accomodate articulation or perception". The same equation between NP and articulatory phonetics can be found in some critical comments on NP; cf. Dressler's rejoinder (1984). 5 Note in passing that if the effects of phonological processes were restricted to peripheral neutral mechanisms it would not make sense to investigate aphasia as a testing ground for naturalness. A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology 13

It is not easy to grasp what is meant by "physical" in these extracts, although the word is of key quality for their understanding. Stampe seems to allude to features of the articulatory organs ("mechanical"?), those of the acoustic signal ("acoustic", "morphological"?) and also to those of the (peripheral?) neural processing of language ("neurophysiological" seems to be opposed to "mental" here). Interestingly, he also alludes to the "temporal" character of language, but leaves it unclear if this is related to the acoustic, articulatory, or neural side of the "physics" of language. But this vagueness nonwithstanding, it can be followed with some justification that NP a la Stampe, although it has been almost exclusively concerned with articulatory explanation in praxi, is not theoretically restricted to this kind of explanation. Instead, it may well be the case that in addition to articulatory explanations of natural mental operations, there may be others. Here, I want to propose that some natural principles may have nothing to do at all with articulation or the physical properties of speech (whatever they may be); but are cognitive from the very start. This does not prevent the respective structures of a language obeying these principles from being "natural", in the sense of reflecting "the needs, capacities, and world of its users" (Donegan & Stampe 1979: 127). The basic tenet of all natural approaches to language, i.e. that it is necessary to distinguish between conventional, "symbolic" linguistic structures and processes on the one hand, and natural, language-independent ones on the other hand, does not lose its importance. But these "needs and capacities" are central neural processing strategies that apply to many, and also to linguistic, materials. This means that in order to catch up with what is going on in the rest of phonology, the very notion of naturalness must be conceived in a more comprehensive way in NP, which includes cognitive processes and structures. In addition to the well- known teleologies of articulatory weakening and perceptual strengthening, a process could then also be called natural if it conforms to general principles of cognitive processing. Note that this is the only way of conceptualizing naturalness that can also be applied to Natural Morphology and Natural Syntax. 6 Only if we see naturalness in a broader, cognitive sense, is it possible to develop a unified theory of naturalness comprising all levels of linguistic structure. Also note that phonology interacts in various ways with morphological and syntactic structure; and if we want to explain why many natural phonological processes have morphologically (or even syntactically) defined domains of application, we have to look at this interaction in terms of natural cognitive processing of meaningful units (morphemes, words, phrases). It is not difficult to find examples for the systematic blockage of otherwise natural phonological processes at morphological boundaries; one is the behaviour of geminates. It is well known that geminates, although being dominated by two timing positions (morae), usually behave like single segments, for they cannot be broken up by phonological processes, or by vowel epenthesis, even if the structural requirements for such processes are satisfied. However, in some languages, the timing positions associated with a geminate can split into two consonantal segments by a phonological

6 Cf. Auer (in press, a). 14 r Liter process if a morphological boundary intervenes. How can i1ii be expiaine‘i! A natur.il explanation for the non-application of phonological processes to geinizia:' , i that the application of a process that facilitates the articulation of a cluster of 1!,.1,..fogeneous consonants would not have this effect on eminates; in fact, it would e‘en ru‘ - e their pronounceability. $ But the same applies to all geminates. regardless of niorphological boundaries. We have to look for a non-articulatory "teleology - in order t‘ , co , le closer to an explan tion. The non-articulatory side of the coin obviotisl is a 'semantic, or morphological) one: semantic units (morphemes) should not he elidang.1 phonological processes. As they are the basic units of cognitive pro,\:.ing, thr is a preference to keep them intact, and this preference counteracts the phonological preference for not diminishing (or increasing) pronounceability. (This, of car, is the upshot of Lexical Phonology, although not stated in functional terms there.' It seems, then, that there are good reasons to ineorporate cognitive teleologies into NP, lest many phonological phenomena are left out of sight. 'Mese reasons are independent from the problem of prod. and how it should he handled in NP. But in fact, prosody is another area in which merely perceptual and .,ii'tleulatory explanations of the low-level kind are not enough to distinguish natural from non-natural phenomena. I want to touch on some of these pheno ita here.

Natural prosody and

There is one cognitive principle, which is so wel atte:ted in all areas of human behaviour, that we can be very sure of its psychologic I reality: the principle of rhythmicity. From Wilhelm Wundt on,9 an impressive amount of evidence has been gathered for it (cf. e.g. Fraisse 1974 for a summary from a gestalt psychologist's view). Rhythm seems to be so important for human cognition, because it establishes an alternation between phases of "tension" (Spannung) and "relaxation" (E1:!spannung) (to use Wundt's terms). On the other hand, there is almost as much evidence for the linguistic reality of rhythmicity. This convergence between cognition and language provides a good starting point for investigating rhythmicity as a natural teleology explaining linguistic regularities. Phonological rhythmicity cannot be captured in terms of the physiology of the speech and hearing organs. Neither can it be explained by reference to the "physical" side of the speech signal alone; for according to a number of recent studies,'" we 'hear' more

For instance, in Tigrinya a postv• c ski stop undergoes spir4 Uizatton.This spiranti „anon is blocked for geminates (Ai Iiii-(PERF)-2mase m. 'he/she killed you' cannot become lqiitaliixkaii, but not if there is a morpheme boundary: fbarak-ka/ 'blerss-(PERF)-2sgmase you blessed' becomes iharax-kal (cf. Schein & Steriade 1986: 698). 8 It may be useful here to the difference between such a natural phonological explanation and the 'explanation' offered in the present-thy generative framework (se, again Schein & Steriade 1986: 692, summarizing other work), which is "that the geminates 1,8.1 resist being split by epenthesis because any inserted vowel will cross association lines with the geminate segment". This is no explanation, but just a formal d,..scription of wh4t happens. 9 Wundt (1887, 11, 25310. 10 Cl, among many others, Donovan & Darwin 0979 Darwin & Donovan (1980), Lehi& :1 and (1 A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology 15 rhythm than there actually is in the speech signal. It has to be concluded that we are dealing with a principle that lacks an articulatory or perceptual basis, but which is nevertheless thoroughly "natural". What are the consequences of rhythmicity for the phonology of language? To begin with, all languages are rhythmically organized in that they alternate between accented and unaccented syllables (although the phonetic correlates of this accentuation may be very different from language to language). There is, however, another feature of rhythm which goes beyond mere alternation, and which is realized in the languages of the world in various ways, i.e. . By this I mean the recurrence of certain prosodic units in an approximately even, perceived temporal spacing. The tendency towards isochrony is one of the important natural principles governing phonology. (Being, as it is, a teleological principle, this means that isochrony need not be achieved everywhere, and possibly not even in the great majority of cases; just as with strengthening and weakening, there are other factors that counteract isochrony and may disturb it in a number of ways.) Isochrony has puzzled phoneticians and linguistics for a long time (see the overview in Auer & Uhmann 1988). The matter still isn't settled, but it seems clear that in a strict phonetic sense, isochrony cannot be expected (although it is by no means clear what "a strict phonetic sense" means in this context). The hypothesis that languages be timed in an isochronous way, as put forward, e.g., by K. Pike (1945), is therefore wrong if taken literally. However, there are many facts that support the less radical view that languages have a tendency towards isochrony, realized to different degrees. More important for NP than the mere phonetic investigation of isochrony is the fact that isochrony has important consequences for the phonology of a language; and as the prosodic unit that is chosen as the basis of isochrony may vary from language to language, rhythm is very likely one of the most central and most predictive properties of phonological systems, correlated which a great many segmental and suprasegmental features. As far as our present knowledge of the prosodies of phonological systems goes, there are mainly two prosodic units that may be the basis of isochrony: the syllable and the . (A third basic timing unit, the , occurs in some languages such as Japanese, but the phonological features correlated with it are similar to those of the syllable-based type. Nothing is known about isochrony on higher levels than the foot - e.g. on the level of the prosodic phrase, or even the breath group.) In the one case, a language strives at keeping the central unit of prosody (and of phonological language processing in general) at a constant duration, i.e. the syllable; with the exception of monosyllabic languages, which rarely have a syllable-based rhythm, this means that isochrony is established below the semantic level. In the other case, the basic rhythm unit 'foot' is strongly related to the minimal self-contained semantic unit, i.e. the word, in the respective language. This is so, because phonological words constitute one foot each in such languages, with the word accent (ictus) usually on one of the first syllables in the word, and pre-ictus syllables (anacrusis) irrelevant for rhythmic structure (cf. Jassem, Hill & Witen 1984). The phonological word, in turn, relates to the morphological word (although, of course, it is not identical with it). The first, syllable-based type of rhythm is therefore more phonologically oriented, the second, 16 Peter .-luer foot-based type more grammatically (semantically) orknt,-,I. A.rJig to an established terminology, we may call languages which foln th first teleo.ogy more than the second syllable - timed (or iso-syllabic). those of the secondpe stressed - timed (or iso-accentual).'' Syllable-timing and stress-timing are two fundamental natural principIs for the rhythmic organisation of language. They have a communicati\s„ , parole) and a structural (langue) aspect. On the communicative side, there is 1h,.! still little understood fact that the rhythmic integration of conversation across srAers' turns seems to be of fundamental importance for establishing and maint.tining " state of talk" (in Goffman's terms), and that rhythmic cues play a central role in the irake-up of such diverse local conversational structures as repair , . telephou dosi;s. topicality, interruptions, etc. There is no room to go into any details horc.; but it is important to underline that the Natural Phonology of rhythm (and of procod, in genchti goes, as does NP in general, beyond the structural level towards a l'unctional explanation, which also includes to the communicative weds of language use)'' Here, I only want to sketch some of the stnictura! points. By refetnc,' to natural principles of stress- and accent-timing, many phonological properties can be explained as natural - because conforming with the rhythm type of a langua,.4c - which would otherwise be left outside the explanatory apparatus of NP. This is true for prosodic features of languages (for instance, rhythmic teleologies help us to explain why some languages have iambic reversal or deaccentuation, why some languages have clitics whereas others don't, etc.). But more than that is involved: the rhythmic principles of stress- and accent-timing make it possible to correlate natural 'segmental' processes with each other so that phonological "types" (in the sense of Skaaka 1 ) emerge, and to allocate individual languages to these types. E.g.: Processes such as or intervocalic consonant weakening are described as natural processes of weakening following an articulatory teleology. But why do these processes occur in some languages, not in others? And why is there a higher probability for vowel reduction and intervocalic consonant weakening to co-occur, than for intervoealic weakening to occur in a language that has no reduced vowels? So far, the only attempt to answer these questions by defining phonological rhythm types has been made by P. Donegan & D. Stampe, two of the leading natural phonologists, in a short paper on the Munda and Mon-Khmer language families, in which they avoid any reference at all to NP (Donegan & Stampe 1983).' The aim of this paper is ambitious indeed, for "syllable" and "word rhythm" (in their terminology) are not only shown to be at the heart of a number of phonological properties of the

II It may turn out that the two alternatives are not really equivalent. For instance, lioequist (1983) assumes that syllable-timing is nothing but the absence of stress-timing. Although this my phonetically true, a more phonological perspective is best served by accepting sylli4ble- and stress-timing as basic rhythmic preferences. Cf. the classic book by Erickson & Shulz (1982) and our work on the contextualizing function of r)ythm; e.g. Couper-Kuhlen :4 Auer (in press), Auer (in press, b), Couper-Kuhlen (1989) and (in press). " This reluctance to indicate any connection with NP is difficult to explain, given the short extracts from Stampets writings cited in the beginning of this paper. It may prove that, after all, Donegan & Stampe believe more in articulatory NP than my interpretation of these extracts suggests. A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology 17 language groups in question (Mon-Khmer is iso-accentual, Munda is iso-syllabic); it is also correlated with their morphological and syntactic properties, in order to give an overall, rhythm based typology. In particular, Donegan & Stampe correlate

syllable rhythm - case system - suffixing - left-bound ('falling') word accent - falling phrasal accent - operator-last syntax (i.e. modifier before modified);

and word rhythm - no case system - prefixing - right-bound (rising') word accent - rising phrasal accent - operator-first syntax.

Although Donegan & Stampets approach is intriguing, it is not without problems either. The most problematic link is certainly the one between word order and sentence prosody on the one hand, and rhythm on the other. Donegan & Stampe claim that iso-syllabic languages have left-bound "word accent", because they also have left- bound "phrasal accent", which, in turn, is due to the fact that the phrasal accent is on asserted (as opposed to given) information in a sentence, and to the fact that modifiers (operators) are asserted rather than given, the opposite holds for iso-accentual languages, which postpone the asserted information (V-final word order) and therefore place the phrasal accent (as well as, by consequence, the word accent) to the right. However, it is far from obvious that modifiers are always (or systematically) new information. (According to many linguistic theories, it is of course the verb, i.e., in this terminology, an operand, which conveys new or rhematic information.) And in fact, many languages which are supposed to be iso-syllabic have right-bound phrasal (and word) accent (French, Turkish), whereas many of those which are commonly held to be iso-accentual (such as the Germanic languages) have left-bound word, but right-bound phrasal accent. The present, more restrictive overview of some of the properties derived from syllable- or foot (word-) based rhythm are confined to phonology, in particular, segmental phonology and remains within the realm of the European languages.' Here, a language which follows iso-accentual teleology to a relatively large degree is English. Such a language will underline the alternation between stressed and unstressed syllables in order to give a clear gestalt to the foot/word, which is its basic unit for isochrony. This implies that unaccented syllables are reduced in quantity and quality; stress-timed languages very often have a reduced vowel system in unaccented position, i.e. some of the phonemic distinctions made in the accent position are lost there. Elements are tightly packaged within the foot (or phonological word), leading to the cliticization of pre- and post-ictus elements. This cliticization may entail the loss of non-ictus syllable nuclei; the remaining consonants are attached to the ictus syllable and may create complex onsets and codas there. These, in turn, lead to various consonantal processes of assimilation and dissimilation. Given the fact that the foot is more important than the syllables it contains, it also follows that syllable boundaries are of little importance; by consequence, there is variability in the syllabification of

" Nevertheless, many of the properties mentioned here are of course also to be found in Donegan & Stampe (1983). I 8 Pete; r intervocalic consonant clusters, above all after short vowels, and there is ambisyllabicity of single intervocalic consonants in the same phonological context. Ictus syllables tend to attract consonantal elements of the following non-ictus syllable. The coherence in the foot is underlined at tho cost of the gestalt of the individual syllables; therefore, syllables within the foot may change their outlook by phonological processes such as flapping or fricativization (which often neutralize phonemic distinctions and are therefore "counter-iconic"). There is no chance for true geminates to occur, for these would presuppose a clear-cut syllable divisii. In an iso- ntl ln ltr f hrn nnnt r dtt■p, rdd t nl nnnt. h nt f th ft (r phnll rd Itrtlr ndrlnd b ftrltd pntn phnn tht bnd th llbl. ntn, ME Opn Sllbl nthnn xhnd flr n th nd llbl f ME hllb rd ndn n h fr n n th frt, ntd lbl: h drppd, th t vl lnthnd In the domain of prosody proper, phenomena such as iambic reversal and deaccentuation can only be explained if rhythm is taken into account. The common denominator for both phenomena (and others) is that the number of unaccented syllables between two accented syllables should be kept at not too great a variance, because "beat clash" (Le. the juxtaposition of two beats) or a large number of unaccented syllables would make it difficult to maintain isochrony of the foot. This is why we get pairs such as rice-president Jones vs. itines, the vice-president, sAteen vs. she was Only sixteen, etc. Turning now to languages which follow the teleology of syllable-timing, we may choose (standard) Italian as a rather typical representative among the European languages. As the basic rhythmic unit for establishing isochrony is the syllable in Italian, vowel reduction in the non-accented syllables is not to be expected. Each syllable has a distinct gestalt and is phonologically speaking on a ar with its neighbouring syllables. (Although ictus syllables are phonetically long in Italian, vowel quantity is not phonemic; therefore, the vowel system in non-ictus position cannot be said to be reduced.) On the other hand, the teleology towards keeping the duration of individual syllables constant requires a relatively uniform syllable structure; this is why syllable-timed languages tend to have strong syllable structure constraints; in Italian, for example, open syllables are statistically speaking much more frequent than, e.g., in English, and in native words, only open syllables are permitted word-finally. The preference for CV-syllables not only makes it easier to produce syllables at an even pace, it also allows the neat separation of syllables: grosso modo, every postvocalic consonant introduces a new syllable. Iso-syllabic languages therefore follow the principle to maximize the onset to a much greater degree than iso-accentual languages. The tendency of lenitions (weakening) and fortitions (strengthening) to be distributed unevenly over syllable onsets and syllable codas (fortitions in the onset, lenitions in the coda) conforms with this principle and therefore also with iso-

Cf. Minkova (1982) for the dtta, Auer (1988) for this interprettion according to "Streitberg\ W", A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology 19

syllabicity. The neat separation of syllables excludes ambisyllabic consonants or any variability of syllabification. However, it is compatible with the occurrence of geminates, as they are observed in some varieties of Italian. If mora compensation takes place in a syllable-timed language, it is confined to the syllable. An example is the well-known generalization that long vowels are followed by single consonants, short vowels by consonant clusters or geminates (recently known as "Prokosch's Law"); the trade-off between vocalic and consonantal morae plays an important role in the nucleus of Italian syllables. As with English, it must be clear that Italian is a language which comes close to the iso-accentual prototype phonology, but doesn't actually represent it in 'pure form'. (For instance, Italian is close to the iso-syllabic type, but contrary to what we would expect,' accent placement plays some role in its grammar, and accent placement is much more flexible than in other iso-syllabic languages such as French or Turkish). In the life of a language, both principles, the one for iso-accentual isochrony and the one for iso- syllabic isochrony, are present; but usually, one is given preference at the expense of the other. That there may be a mixture of elements from the two prototypes in many of the actual occurring languages is, not in the least, due to diachronic changes of rhythm type, such as in English from iso-syllabic to iso-accentual. The great advantage of working with rhythmic teleologies is that this makes it possible to develop a holistic picture of a phonology; the atomistic listing of segmental processes subsumed under fortition or lenition - a certain danger in NP; cf., e.g. the introductory chapters in Edwards & Shriberg (1983) - is thereby avoided.

3. Concluding remarks

What has been said in the last section is far from qualifying as a natural phonology of prosody. Many things have been left out. In particular, rhythmic structure does not only relate to phonology; it also interacts with syntax and semantics. Again, we find natural principles governing this interaction. Above all, there is an important iconic relationship between syntax and rhythmic structure: we expect rhythmic grouping on various hierarchical levels to reflect syntactic grouping, and vice versa. (Contrary to Selkirk 1984, I do not think that rhythmic grouping is unidirectionally governed by syntax; in fact, some syntactic regularities are governed by rhythm, as Behaghel correctly notes in his "Gesetz der schweren Glieder" (1932). Examples abound; for instance, German Ausklammerung (right-dislocation of

16 Donegan & Stampe (1983) correlate iso-syllabic phonologies with left-bound word and sentence accent, but iso-accentual phonologies with rightbound accent (s. above). This may be true for the Munda and Mon-Khmer language families but is difficult to apply to iso-syllabic or iso-moric language such as the Turc languages or Japanese (with fixed rightbound accent or flexible/lacking word accent). The alternative point of view adopted here is that (word and phrasal) accent plays a more important role for the phonetics, phonology and morphonology of a prototypically iso-accentual language (cf. its grammatical functions in Russian, German, English) than it does in a prototypically iso-syllabic language. Theoretically, this follows from the importance of the foot (defined by stressed syllables) in iso-accentual languages. 0 Auer constituents out of the verbal brackets), is rarily govcriw,1 by rhythmic considerations.) Taking this kind of iconick id i rrires us enough flexibility to deal with counter-iconic relatiov., betwii syntax aii4 ihythm as well. When syntax and rhythm 'fall apart'. thk would be d,..-scribed as either conventionalized, or as a stylistic mannerism.'' Finally, it must be cle r that prosody covers rrior . than just rhythm; rly plea for a cognitive approach to natural principles applies to intonatIon .is well. Few :,,,,arehers have dared to inquire into the natural, possibly ickyik- bas,;'s of intonation tbut cf. Bolinger 1983); it is time to ask if any intonation contour nIn any thing. i.e. if pitch movement is totally conventionalized in intonation. Rut th;:" natural bases for intonation, whatever they may be, will certainly not be found inth articulatory organs to any interesting degree: they must be cognitive.

Incidentally, one which German TV commentators seem to he particularly inclined to. A Note on Prosody in Natural Phonology 21

REFERENCES

Auer, Peter. 1988. "Some ways to count morae: Prokosch's Law, Streitberg's Law, Pfalz's Law and other rhythmic regularities" = KontRI Working Paper No 6, University of Constance, Department of Linguistics, Dec.1988. Auer, Peter. in press (a). "Nattirlichkeit und Stil." To appear in: V. Hinnenkamp & M. Selting (eds) Soziolinguistik von Sprechstilen. Ttibingen: Niemeyer. Auer, Peter. in press (b) "Rhythmic integration in phone closings." = KontRI Working Paper No 2, Constance; to appear in: M. de Fornel et al. (eds) Proceedings of the conference on "Analyse d'action et analyse de conversation". Auer, Peter & Susanne Uhmann. 1988. "Silben- und akzentzahlende Sprachen Forschungsstand und Diskussion." Zeitschrift ftir Sprachwissenschaft 2/1988. Behaghel, Otto. 1932. Deutsche Syntax, Bd. IV . Heidelberg: Winter. Bertinetto, P.M. 1985. "A proposito di alcuni recenti contributi alla prosodia delleitaliano". Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa XV, 581-643. Bolinger, Dwight. 1983. "Where does intonation belong?" J. Sem. 2.2., 101-120. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. in press. "Contextualizing discourse: the prosody of interactive repair". To appear in: P. Auer & A. di Luzio (eds) Contextualizing Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 1989. "Speech rhythm and its turn-taking functions in everyday conversation" = KontRI Working Paper No. 5, Constance. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Peter Auer. in press. "On the contextualizing function of speech rhythm in conversation: question-answer sequences." To appear in: J. Verschueren (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd Intern. Pragmatics Conference. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Darwin, C.J. & A. Donovan. 1980. "Perceptual studies of speech rhythm: isochrony and intonation." In: J.C. Simon (ed) Proc. of the NATO-ASI on Spoken Language Generation and Understanding. Dordrecht: Reidel, 77-95. Donegan, Patricia J. & David Stampe. 1979. "The study of Natural Phonology." In: D.A. Dinnsen (ed) Current Approaches to Phonological Theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 126-173. Donegan, Patricia J. & David Stampe. 1983. "Rhythm and the holistic organization of language structure." In: CLS 19, Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology & Syntax, 337-353. Donovan, A. & C.J. Darwin. 1979. "The perceived rhythm of speech". In: Proc. 9th Intern. Congr. Phon.Sci., Copenhagen, Vol. II, 268-274. Dressler, Wolfgang. 1984. "Explaining Natural Phonology". Phonology Yearbook 1, r

Edwards. M.L. & L.D. Shriberg, 1983. Phonoloo . San Ili!, Press. Erickson, Frederick & Jeffrey Shultz. 1982. The Counselor ass CfAcepier. Social Interaction in Interviews. NY: Academic Press. Fraisse, Paul. 1974. Psychologic du rythrne. Paris. Jassem, W., D.R. Hill & 1,H. \Viten. 1984. "Isochroly in English its statisti,:al validity and linguistic relevance. In: D. Gibbon & H Rr4 is Intonation, Accent I Rhythm Berlin: de Gruyter, 203-255 Hoequist, Charles Jr. 1983. "Syllabk duration in stress-, „A a d languages." Phonetica 40, 203-237. Hurch. Bernhard. 1988. Ober Aspiration. TUN; n: Nam Hutcheson, LW. 1973. A Natural History of Complete Consonan I Assi Ph.D. thesis, Ohio State University. Lehiste, Use. 1973. "Rhythmic units and syntactic units in production and perception. JASA 54, 1228-1234. Lehiste, Ilse. 1977. "Isochrony recon.sikkred," J. Phonet, 5, 3-263. Minkova, Donka. 1982. "The environment for open syllable lengthening in Middle English." Fol. Ling, Hist. 29-58. Pike, Kenneth. 1945. The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Ralph, Bo. 1981. "Rule nquralness and rule diffusion." In: W. Dressler et al. (eds) Phonologica 1980. Innsbruck, 343-349. Schein, Barry & Donca Steriade. 1986. On geminates. Ling. Inqu. 17.4, 691-744. Selkirk, Elizabeth .1984. Phonology and Syntax: the Relation Between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, Mass. Skali6ka, V. 1966. "Ein Ptypologisches Konstrukt. — Travaux Linguistiques de Prague (TLP) II, 157-165. Stampe, D. 1979. A Dissertation on Natural Phonology. IULC. Vennemann, Theo. 1986. Neuere Entwicklungen in der Phonologic. Berlin: Mouton. Wojcik, Richard 1981. "Natural phonology and generative phonology". In: D. Goyvaerts (ed) Phonology in the 1980s. Ghent: Story-Scientia, 635-647. Wundt, Wilh. 3 1887. Grundziige der physiologischen Psychologie, Leipzig: W. Engelmann.