DOCSLIB.ORG

Northwestern University the Acquisition of English Focus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northwestern University the Acquisition of English Focus Northwestern University The Acquisition of English Focus Marking by Non-Native Speakers A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Field of Linguistics By Rachel Elizabeth Baker EVANSTON, ILLINOIS 2010 1 © Copyright by Rachel Elizabeth Baker 2010 All Rights Reserved 2 ABSTRACT The Acquisition of English Focus Marking by Non-Native Speakers Rachel Elizabeth Baker Second language learners experience difficulties mastering the various linguistic systems of their new language (L2), which may differ from the systems of their native language (L1). Correctly producing and understanding focus marking in a new language may be particularly challenging because it can require knowledge of several of these systems, including phonetics, phonology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. This study examines Mandarin and Korean speakers’ acquisition of English prosodic focus marking. In this study, 20 native English speakers, 20 native Mandarin speakers, and 20 native Korean speakers participated in four experiments: 1) a production experiment, in which they were recorded reading the answers to questions, 2) a perception experiment, in which they were asked to determine which word in a recording was the last prominent word, 3) an understanding experiment, in which they were asked whether the answers in recorded question-answer pairs had context-appropriate prosody, and 4) a pitch accent placement experiment, in which they were asked which word they would make prominent in a particular context. Finally, a new group of native English speakers listened to utterances produced in the production experiment, and determined whether the prosody of each utterance was appropriate for its context. Based on the results of the five experiments, I propose a predictive framework for second language prosodic focus marking acquisition. This framework holds that both L1 transfer and features of the L2 itself affect language learners’ acquisition of prosodic focus marking, so it includes two complementary models: the Transfer Model and the L2 Challenge Model. The Transfer Model predicts that prosodic structures in the L2 will be more easily acquired by 3 language learners that have similar structures in their L1 than those who do not, even if there are differences between the L1 and L2 in how the structures are realized. The L2 Challenge Model predicts that for hard tasks, language learners will rely on common prosodic patterns, making them more successful at prosodically marking broad focus than narrow focus. However, for easy tasks, language learners will more successfully mark information structures that have a more direct relationship between focus and accent placement. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people helped me to complete this dissertation. Ann Bradlow provided invaluable advice, feedback, and encouragement throughout this project. Brady Clark and Janet Pierrehumbert have also given me very helpful guidance on issues ranging from the questions that should be addressed to stimulus design to references in the literature. More generally, the faculty and staff of the Northwestern Linguistics Department have helped me reach this point though their dedicated teaching and approachability. I would particularly like to thank Chun Chan for his assistance with all manner of technical challenges, and Matt Goldrick for his statistical guidance. Of course, my fellow Ph.D. students have helped me both practically and emotionally for the last six years. My family has also provided great support as I worked towards this goal. Patrick Quinan has seen me through all the highs and lows that make up the Ph.D. lifestyle. He has been endlessly supportive and loving. My parents, Rona and Gus Baker, have provided great role models and always supported my decisions. I would also like to thank my grandfather, Stan Baker, for his generous support of my education throughout my life. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................11 LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................................17 Chapter 1: Introduction and Literature Review…………………………………………….........20 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………….20 1.2 Significance of the Research…..……………………………………………………..22 1.3 Review of the Literature……………………………………………………………..25 1.3.1 Typology of Focus Marking……………………………………………..25 1.3.2 English Prosody and Focus Marking…………………………………….26 1.3.2.1 English Prosody………………………………………………….26 1.3.2.2 English Focus Marking…………………………………………..27 1.3.3 Mandarin Prosody and Focus Marking…………………………………..32 1.3.4 Korean Prosody and Focus Marking……………………………………..35 1.3.5 Do English, Mandarin, and Korean have the same Focus Marking System?......................................................................................................36 1.3.6 Discourse-Level Prosody Production in Non-Native English…………...40 1.3.7 Prosody Perception in Non-Native English……………………………...42 1.3.8 Relationship between Perception and Production……………………….44 1.4 Previous Models of Second Language Acquisition………………………………….46 1.4.1 Transfer Models of Phonological and Phonetic Acquisition…………….46 1.4.2 Non-Transfer Models of Morpho-Syntactic Acquisition………………...50 1.5 Two Types of Models of English Prosodic Focus Marking Acquisition………….....51 1.5.1 Transfer Models……………………………………………………….....54 1.5.1.1 Comparisons between L1s and L2 for Transfer Models………....54 1.5.1.2 Transfer Model Predictions for Pitch Accent Perception and Realization……………………………………………………….55 1.5.1.3 Transfer Model Predictions for Pitch Accent Understanding and Placement………………………………………………………...56 1.5.1.3.1 Opposing Transfer Models…………………………..56 1.5.1.3.2 Different Prominence Locations Hurt………………..58 1.5.1.3.3 Any Prominence Location Helps………………….…59 1.5.2 L2 Challenge Models………………………………………………….…60 1.5.2.1 L2 Challenge Model Predictions for Pitch Accent Perception and Realization……………………………………………………….61 1.5.2.2 L2 Challenge Models’ Predictions for Pitch Accent Understanding and Placement……………………………………………………62 1.5.3 Summary and Comparison of Model Predictions………………………..64 1.6 Native Perception of Non-Native Production………………………………………..65 1.6.1 Strict Native Perception Model…………………………………………..65 1.6.2 Relaxed Native Perception Model……………………………………….66 1.6.3 Summary and Comparison of Model Predictions………………………..67 6 1.7 Relationship between Perception and Production……………………………………67 1.7.1 Perception/Production Dependence Model……………………………....68 1.7.2 Perception/Production Independence Model…………………………….69 1.7.3 Summary and Comparison of Model Predictions……………………......70 Chapter 2: Methods………………………………………………………………………………71 2.1 Introduction…….…………………………………………………………………….71 2.2 General Experiment Structure………………………………………………………..72 2.3 General Materials…………………………………………………………………….73 2.4 Participants…………………………………………………………………………...76 2.5 Experiment 1: Prominence Production Experiment…………………………………79 2.5.1 Experiment 1: Prominence Production Experiment Materials…………..79 2.5.2 Experiment 1: Prominence Production Experiment Design……………..79 2.6 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Experiment……………………………….....80 2.6.1 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Experiment Materials…………...80 2.6.2 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Experiment Design……………..83 2.7 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Experiment……………………………..84 2.7.1 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Experiment Materials……....84 2.7.2 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Experiment Design…………85 2.8 Experiment 4: Prominence Placement Experiment………………………………….86 2.8.1 Experiment 4: Prominence Placement Experiment Materials…………...86 2.8.2 Experiment 4: Prominence Placement Experiment Design……………...86 2.9 Experiment 5: Native Perception of Non-Native Production Experiment……….......87 2.9.1 Experiment 5: Native Perception of Non-Native Production Participants……………………………………………………………….87 2.9.2 Experiment 5: Native Perception of Non-Native Production Experiment Materials………………………………………………………………....88 2.9.3 Experiment 5: Native Perception of Non-Native Production Experiment Design……………………………………………………………………88 2.10 Statistical Analysis…………………………………...……………………………..89 Chapter 3: Non-native Perception and Understanding of English Prosodic Prominence - Experiments 2 and 3……………………………………………………………………………...94 3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..94 3.2 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Experiment………………………………….96 3.2.1 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Experiment Analyses…………...96 3.2.2 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Native/Non-Native Regressions...98 3.2.3 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Non-Native Regressions………100 3.2.4 Experiment 2: Prominence Perception Discussion……………………..101 3.3 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Experiment……………………………102 3.3.1 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Experiment Analyses……...102 3.3.2 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Context Regressions……....103 3.3.2.1 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Native/Non-Native Context Regressions…………………………………………….103 7 3.3.2.2 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Non-Native Context Regressions……………………………………………………..105 3.3.3 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Accent Location Regressions……………………………………………………………..107 3.3.3.1 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Native/Non-Native Accent Location Regressions…………………………………...107 3.3.3.2 Experiment 3: Prominence Understanding Non-Native
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of Pitch Reset in Perception at Discourse Boundaries
    ICPhS XVII Regular Session Hong Kong, 17-21 August 2011 THE ROLE OF PITCH RESET IN PERCEPTION AT DISCOURSE BOUNDARIES Hsin-Yi Lin & Janice Fon Graduate Institute of Linguistics, National Taiwan University, Taiwan [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT pitch contours tend to be the same or on the same declining track [4, 5]. Such a melodic continuity The present study is targeted to investigate how can be broken by pitch reset for speakers to mark pitch reset as a boundary correlate functions in shift of topic or segmentation in discourse. The indicating structural information in discourse for second aspect is its ability to reflect hierarchical listeners. Two experiments were conducted: one status of a boundary. Many studies have indicated was a boundary detection test, and the other was a that the amount of pitch reset is bigger across boundary hierarchy rating test. Results of both discourse segments than within [6, 8, 11], experiments indicated that listeners indeed rely on suggesting that as boundaries become bigger, the the presence and the strength of pitch reset in amount of pitch reset is larger too, making it a nice decoding hierarchical segmentation in discourse. indicator in reflecting boundary hierarchy. Keywords: pitch reset, boundary correlate, As established in the above studies, speakers discourse boundary, discourse hierarchy, prosody use pitch reset, among other cues, to encode segmentation and hierarchical structure in 1. INTRODUCTION discourse. Therefore, the present study aims itself In human communication, discourse structure on investigating whether listeners also use this cue plays an important role in providing speakers with to decode discourse structure in speech.
    [Show full text]
  • The Phonology of Tone and Intonation
    This page intentionally left blank The Phonology of Tone and Intonation Tone and Intonation are two types of pitch variation, which are used by speak- ers of many languages in order to give shape to utterances. More specifically, tone encodes morphemes, and intonation gives utterances a further discoursal meaning that is independent of the meanings of the words themselves. In this comprehensive survey, Carlos Gussenhoven provides an up-to-date overview of research into tone and intonation, discussing why speakers vary their pitch, what pitch variations mean, and how they are integrated into our grammars. He also explains why intonation in part appears to be universally understood, while at other times it is language-specific and can lead to misunderstandings. The first eight chapters concern general topics: phonetic aspects of pitch mod- ulation; typological notions (stress, accent, tone, and intonation); the distinction between phonetic implementation and phonological representation; the paralin- guistic meaning of pitch variation; the phonology and phonetics of downtrends; developments from the Pierrehumbert–Beckman model; and tone and intona- tion in Optimality Theory. In chapters 9–15, the book’s central arguments are illustrated with comprehensive phonological descriptions – partly in OT – of the tonal and intonational systems of six languages, including Japanese, French, and English. Accompanying sound files can be found on the author’s web site: http://www.let.kun.nl/pti Carlos Gussenhoven is Professor and Chair of General and Experimental Phonology at the University of Nijmegen. He has previously published On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents (1994), English Pronunciation for Student Teachers (co-authored with A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perception and Production of Stress and Intonation by Children with Cochlear Implants
    THE PERCEPTION AND PRODUCTION OF STRESS AND INTONATION BY CHILDREN WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS ROSEMARY O’HALPIN University College London Department of Phonetics & Linguistics A dissertation submitted to the University of London for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2010 ii ABSTRACT Users of current cochlear implants have limited access to pitch information and hence to intonation in speech. This seems likely to have an important impact on prosodic perception. This thesis examines the perception and production of the prosody of stress in children with cochlear implants. The interdependence of perceptual cues to stress (pitch, timing and loudness) in English is well documented and each of these is considered in analyses of both perception and production. The subject group comprised 17 implanted (CI) children aged 5;7 to 16;11 and using ACE or SPEAK processing strategies. The aims are to establish (i) the extent to which stress and intonation are conveyed to CI children in synthesised bisyllables (BAba vs. baBA) involving controlled changes in F 0, duration and amplitude (Experiment I), and in natural speech involving compound vs. phrase stress and focus (Experiment II). (ii) when pitch cues are missing or are inaudible to the listeners, do other cues such as loudness or timing contribute to the perception of stress and intonation? (iii) whether CI subjects make appropriate use of F 0, duration and amplitude to convey linguistic focus in speech production (Experiment III). Results of Experiment I showed that seven of the subjects were unable to reliably hear pitch differences of 0.84 octaves. Most of the remaining subjects required a large (approx 0.5 octave) difference to reliably hear a pitch change.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Pitch Range in Focus Marking
    The role of pitch range in focus marking Edward Flemming MIT Prosodic marking of focus It appears that a wide variety of prosodic resources are employed to mark material as focused: • Pitch accent placement. – Accenting, post-focal deaccenting (e.g. English) • Phrase boundary placement. – Boundary precedes/follows focus (e.g. Chichewa), post-focal dephrasing (e.g. Japanese, Korean) • Pitch range. – Expansion of pitch range on focus, narrowing of post-focal pitch range (e.g. Mandarin). • Duration. Prosodic marking of focus • Languages typically use more than one of these strategies in marking focus. • But there are apparently basic divisions between languages: – Pitch accent is central to focus marking in English, but many languages lack intonational pitch accents (e.g. Mandarin, Japanese). – Phrasing is reported to play a central role in focus marking in Japanese and Korean, but English does not systematically use phrasing for this purpose. Prosodic marking of focus Proposal: • Pitch range is fundamental to focus-marking in typologically diverse languages including Mandarin, Japanese and English. – Expanded pitch range on focus, compressed pitch range after focus. • Post-focal pitch range compression motivates/creates the appearance of post-focal deaccenting and dephrasing. • These pitch range manipulations serve to increase the relative prominence of Focus compared to non-focal material. Focus • Focus - “the informative part of an utterance”. • ‘the information in the sentence that is assumed by the speaker not to be shared by him and the hearer’ (Jackendoff 1972). • Diagnosed by: – Question-Answer congruence • (Who saw Bill?) [Mary]F saw Bill. – Correction • (Ted saw Bill.) No, [Mary]F saw Bill. – Association with a focus-sensitive particle • Only [Mary]F saw Bill.
    [Show full text]
  • The Acquisition of Mandarin Prosody by American Learners of Chinese As a Foreign Language
    The Acquisition of Mandarin Prosody by American Learners of Chinese as a Foreign Language (CFL) Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Chunsheng Yang, B.A., M.A. Graduate Program in East Asian Languages and Literatures The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Marjorie K.M. Chan, Advisor Dr. Mary E. Beckman Dr. Cynthia Clopper Dr. Mineharu Nakayama Copyright by Chunsheng Yang 2011 ABSTRACT In the acquisition of second language (L2) or foreign language (FL) pronunciation, learners not only learn how to pronounce consonants and vowels (tones as well, in the case of tone languages, such as Mandarin Chinese), they also learn how to produce the vowel reduction, vowel-consonant co-articulation, and prosody. Central to this dissertation is prosody, which refers to the way that an utterance is broken up into smaller units, and the acoustic patterns of each unit at different levels, in terms of fundamental frequency (F0), duration and amplitude. In L2 pronunciation, prosody is as important as -- if not more important than -- consonants and vowels. This dissertation examines the acquisition of Mandarin prosody by American learners of Chinese as a Foreign Language (CFL). Specifically, it examines four aspects of Mandarin prosody: (1) prosodic phrasing (i.e., breaking up of utterances into smaller units); (2) surface F0 and duration patterns of prosodic phrasing in a group of sentence productions elicited from L1 and L2 speakers of Mandarin Chinese; (3) patterns of tones errors in L2 Mandarin productions; and (4) the relationship between tone errors and prosodic phrasing in L2 Mandarin.
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Intonation and Prosody in Bininj Gun-Wok: an Autosegmental-Metrical Analysis
    Aspects of intonation and prosody in Bininj Gun-wok: an autosegmental-metrical analysis Judith Bishop Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics The University of Melbourne August 2002 Abstract This dissertation presents a qualitative and quantitative analysis of aspects of the intonation and prosody of an Australian polysynthetic language, Bininj Gun-wok (BGW; also referred to as Mayali). The theoretical framework is autosegmental-metrical phonology, as adapted to the description of intonation by Pierrehumbert (1980), Bruce (1977) and others. The analysis focuses principally on two dialects, Kuninjku and Manyallaluk Mayali (MM), with some reference to the Kunwinjku, Kune, Gun-Djeihmi and Kundedjnjenghmi dialects. One of the principal motivations for analysing intonation and prosody in BGW is to provide input to the developing field of intonational-prosodic typology, from the perspective of a language which is typologically interesting on at least two counts: its position in the Australian language family, and its polysynthetic character. This dissertation provides numerous auditory as well as visual records relating to the contents of the analysis. The provision of auditory records is an innovation intended to improve the accountability of the phonetic analysis and to facilitate typological comparison. The content of the chapters is as follows. In Chapter 1, I review the literature on intonation and prosody in polysynthetic languages (§1.2) and in Australian languages (§1.3), and highlight findings relating to possible parameters in intonational-prosodic typology (§1.3). I outline the grammatical and segmental phonological structures of BGW (§1.4) and describe the autosegmental-metrical theoretical framework (§1.5).
    [Show full text]
  • The Phonetics and Phonology of Intonational Phrasing in Romance*
    THE PHONETICS AND PHONOLOGY OF INTONATIONAL PHRASING IN ROMANCE* SÓNIA FROTA*, MARIAPAOLA D’IMPERIO+, GORKA ELORDIETA!, PILAR PRIETO∧ and MARINA VIGÁRIO∨ *Universidade de Lisboa, +Laboratoire Parole et Language – CNRS, !Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, ∧ICREA & Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, ∨Universidade do Minho This paper examines the phonetics and phonology of intonational boundaries in five Romance languages/varieties. A typology of the boundary cues used is given, as well as their relative frequency. The phonology of the tonal boundary gesture is described by means of the inventory of nuclear accents used plus their possible combinations with the two dominant end contours: continuation rise (H) and sustained pitch (!H). A detailed inspection of the phonetics of the H boundary tone, which is the main cue observed across languages, is provided: namely, the impact on H scaling of nuclear accent choice, phrase length and first peak height is assessed. Overall, it is shown that the variation found consistently groups languages in two sets: the Catalan-Spanish group and the Italian- European Portuguese group. 1. Introduction Intonational phrasing in Romance has been the topic of recent research conducted within the Romance languages intonational phrasing project (Elordieta et al. 2003; Elordieta, Frota & Vigário 2005; D’Imperio et al. 2005; Prieto 2005, 2007; Frota & Vigário forthcoming). The main goals of this project are to establish the patterns of placement of intonational boundaries, to determine the influence of syntactic and prosodic factors on boundary placement, and to describe the phonetics and phonology of intonational boundaries. To attain these goals intonational phrasing has been studied on a corpus of laboratory speech which was designed to be comparable across languages – the Romance Languages Database (RLD).
    [Show full text]
  • A Systematic Review of Hindi Prosody
    A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF HINDI PROSODY Somnath Roy Centre for Linguistics Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi-110067 Abstract: Prosody describes both form and function of a sentence using the suprasegmental features of speech. Prosody phenomena are explored in the domain of higher phonological constituents such as word, phonological phrase and intonational phrase. The study of prosody at the word level is called word prosody and above word level is called sentence prosody. Word Prosody describes stress pattern by comparing the prosodic features of its constituent syllables. Sentence Prosody involves the study on phrasing pattern and intonatonal pattern of a language. The aim of this study is to summarize the existing works on Hindi prosody carried out in different domain of language and speech processing. The review is presented in a systematic fashion so that it could be a useful resource for one who wants to build on the existing works. INTRODUCTION Prosody is an important aspect of spoken language. A slight modulation in prosody may lead to change in the meaning of an utterance. Prosody is studied at various levels in different branches of science and engineering. In linguistics, the leading branches which contribute to the knowledge of prosody are Phonetics, Phonology, Syntax, Semantics and Psycholinguistics. In Cognitive Science, neurophysiological correlates such as the spectro-temporal feature of cortical oscillation in theta, beta, gamma, and delta band are examined as a cue of prosody. Finally, engineers use these features for developing an automatic module for categorization of prosodic events. Modern standard Hindi is an Indo-Aryan language spoken mainly in northern part of India, and also an official language of Fiji.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosodic Focus Within and Across Languages
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2015 Prosodic Focus Within and Across Languages Yong-cheol Lee University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Discourse and Text Linguistics Commons, and the Phonetics and Phonology Commons Recommended Citation Lee, Yong-cheol, "Prosodic Focus Within and Across Languages" (2015). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1534. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1534 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1534 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Prosodic Focus Within and Across Languages Abstract The fact that "purely" prosodic marking of focus may be weaker in some languages than in others, and that it varies in certain circumstances even within a single language, has not been commonly recognized. Therefore, this dissertation investigated whether and how purely prosodic marking of focus varies within and across languages. We conducted production and perception experiments using a paradigm of 10-digit phone-number strings in which the same material and discourse contexts were used in different languages. The results demonstrated that prosodic marking of focus varied across languages. Speakers of American English, Mandarin Chinese, and Standard French clearly modulated duration, pitch, and intensity to indicate the position of corrective focus. Listeners of these languages recognized the focus position with high accuracy. Conversely, speakers of Seoul Korean, South Kyungsang Korean, Tokyo Japanese, and Suzhou Wu produced a weak and ambiguous modulation by focus, resulting in a poor identification performance. This dissertation also revealed that prosodic marking of focus varied even within a single language.
    [Show full text]
  • On Prosody and Reported Speech TOWARDS an EXPLORATORY METHODOLOGY Leonardo Contreras Roa LLACAN UMR 8135 December 12, 2020 a Bit of Theory
    On prosody and reported speech TOWARDS AN EXPLORATORY METHODOLOGY Leonardo Contreras Roa LLACAN UMR 8135 December 12, 2020 A bit of theory Speakers “do not always explicitly introduce different ‘voices’ with reporting verbs or quotative constructions. Instead, figures are often ‘brought on stage’ for the first time merely by being animated, without, for instance, a prefatory he said or she said. […] The figure’s ‘voice’ must be reconstructibly different from the current speaker’s own ‘voice’”. (Couper-Kuhlen, 1997, p. 13) → Prosodic and paralinguistic features A bit of theory “Prosodic and paralinguistic effects are in fact deictic to a certain extent: they involve speaking within a given range of relative loudness, pitch and tempo […] and with a given voice quality.” (p. 14) A bit of theory • Prosodically, reported speech can be more or less integrated into the quotative frame. This helps establishing a distance from the narrator’s own voice. • The degree of prosodic integration depends on several features (Genetti, 2011): • Positioning of prosodic and syntactic boundaries • Patterns of terminal contours • Changes in: Separate • Loudness intonational unit • Pitch range (IU) • Register • Timing Objectives • Determining if reported speech is prosodically detached from the quotative frame in storytelling in [LANGUAGE ]. If it is, • Identifying in which cases. • Describing how (acoustically/phonetically). Acoustic correlates of perceptive variables Perceptive Acoustic 1. Pitch variations → F0 (Hz, st) 2. Pause duration → Time (s) 3. Speech rate → Syllables or phonemes/s (including pauses) 4. Loudness variations → Intensity (dB) 1. Pitch variations Reported (direct) speech in English and other European languages: • Higher pitch range than indirect speech (ΔF0, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intonation of Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic
    This is a repository copy of The intonation of Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/81052/ Version: Accepted Version Book Section: Chahal, Dana and Hellmuth, Sam orcid.org/0000-0002-0062-904X (2014) The intonation of Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic. In: Jun, Sun Ah, (ed.) Prosodic Typology Volume II. Oxford University Press , GBR , pp. 365-404. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567300.003.0013 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 1 The intonation of Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic Dana Chahal & Sam Hellmuth X.1 Introduction In this chapter, we describe aspects of the prosody of two Arabic dialects which have been studied within the Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) framework, namely (Tripoli) Lebanese Arabic and (Cairene) Egyptian Arabic. We do not claim to provide a model for Arabic intonation in general, nor a model of Arabic dialectal intonational variation, since research in this field is still largely unexplored1.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Paper
    How Many Levels of Phrasing? Empirical Questions and Typological Implications Sam Hellmuth University of York 1. Introduction This paper explores whether a phase-based approach to the syntax-phonology interface can account for the prosodic phrasing facts of Egyptian Arabic (EA), and the potential implications of such an analysis for our understanding of the nature of the prosodic hierarchy (in EA if not beyond). Specifically, we examine the phrasing facts observed in a corpus of syntactically complex and prosodically heavy VOO read speech sentences, in comparison to previously published generalisations for parallel SVO sentences, for evidence to disambiguate between the predictions of competing conceptions of the syntax-phonology interface: ‘edge-based’, in which the phonology is sensitive to the edges of lexical maximal projections (Selkirk 1986) vs. ‘phase-based’, in which prosodic structure is mapped from functional projections (Chomsky 2001). The evidence proves to be finely balanced, but we do find that the mapping must, under either analysis, result in a level of phonological representation mediating between syntactic structure and phonetic implementation, to account for observed prosodic minimality effects. In addition, the detail of the phonetic implementation suggests that the intervening prosodic representation must be one which allows recursive structure. We conclude by suggesting that EA prosodic structure may consist of fewer levels of phrasing than proposed even in recent, universally restricted, conceptions of the Prosodic Hierarchy (Itô & Mester to appear). 2. Background to the study Egyptian Arabic (EA) is defined here as the dialect of Arabic spoken in Cairo, which functions as a national standard throughout Egypt (Haeri 1996, Bassiouney 2009).
    [Show full text]