Workshop on Developing an International Prosodic Alphabet (IPrA) within the AM framework (a Satellite meeting of ICPhS 2015, Glasgow, August 12, 2015), organized by S.-A. Jun, J. I. Hualde, & P. Prieto

Working Proposal on tonal labels for Phrasal/Boundary tones

0. Introduction

In the AM model of intonational phonology, tones mark either prominence (e.g., pitch accent) or phrasing (e.g., boundary tones), and languages differ in their ways to mark these prosodic properties. In this proposal, we will focus on tones marking phrasing or prosodic units. It is now well known (e.g., Frota & Prieto 2015; Jun 2005, 2014; Frota et al. 2007; Ladd 1996/2008; Gussenhoven 2004; Nespor & Vogel 1986) that, though languages differ in the number of prosodic units and how each unit is prosodically marked, four prosodic units have been observed to be marked by : from the largest to the smallest– an Intonational Phrase (IP), an Intermediate Phrase (ip), an Accentual Phrase (AP), and a Prosodic Word (PW). Tones marking each are described in the following four sections. In this proposal, only labels for tones which mark a prosodic unit are proposed. For labels for non-tonal features, please see the proposal prepared by José Hualde.

1. An Intonational Phrase (IP)

An Intonational Phrase (IP) is the largest prosodic unit and is typically marked by substantial lengthening of the phrase-final , i.e., phrase-final lengthening, and a boundary tone on the edge of the phrase, either initial or final or both edges. It is also optionally followed by a pause. The boundary tone is typically realized on the phrase- edge (IP-initial or -final) syllable, but it can also be realized over multiple at the edge of an IP. Boundary tones can also differ by the complexity and scale of tones. So far, four types of tonal scale have been used for IP boundary tones, similar to the case with pitch accents (High, Low, Mid, and Super-high), and for tonal complexity, from one to five tonal elements have been used for a single boundary tone (e.g., H%, LH%, LHL%, LHLH%, LHLHL%).

1.1 Monotonal IP boundary tones

IP-final boundary tones A monotonal IP-final boundary tone is realized on the IP-final syllable or .

Low L% : f0 valley on a host TBU (syllable or mora); common across languages

High H% : f0 peak on a host TBU; common across languages

Super-high : When a High tone is much higher than the default High of the speaker’s pitch range, along the top line of f0 declination.

^H% e.g., German (Grice et al. 2005; Dalabon, Fletcher 2014) ¡H% e.g., all varieties of Spanish (Prieto & Roseano eds. 2010), Portuguese

Q: which tone label to use for super-high? Proposal: use ¡H%.

Mid : Unlike pitch accents, two types of tonal labels have been used for a mid-f0-level boundary tone, i.e., !H% and M%.

!H% e.g., Catalan, Prieto 2014; European Portuguese, Frota 2014; Dalabon, Fletcher, 2014; Greek, Arvaniti & Baltazani 2005) M% e.g., Castilian and other dialects of Spanish, Prieto & Roseano, eds. 2010; Jamaican Creole, Gooden 2014. Note, researchers working on Spanish have recently changed this label to !H%.

Q: which tone label to use for a mid boundary tone? Proposal: use !H%.

A downstepped H tone (!H) implies that the High tone target is realized lower (i.e., in a reduced pitch range) than that of the preceding H, i.e., syntagmatic comparison of pitch targets. This will be the case when !H is used for pitch accents. For a boundary tone, however, !H should be interpreted as a High tone target realized lower than the typical H target in the speaker’s default pitch range, thus representing a paradigmatic comparison of pitch targets among boundary tones. The same is true with the super-high tone symbol, ¡H.

This double interpretation of !H or ¡H depending on the function (prominence vs. edge marking) well captures how the pitch range of a phrase interacts. That is, the boundary tones seem to have their own pitch range independent of the pitch range for the rest of the phrase. For example, after a multiple application of across a sequence of pitch accents, we can still see a high f0 for H- or H%.

High plateau : when an IP boundary stays high after an earlier High tone target H-% e.g., German (Grice et al. 2005) 0% e.g., German (Grabe 1998) H:%1 e.g., Cantonese (Wong et al. 2005)

Low plateau : when an IP boundary stays low after an earlier Low tone target L-% e.g., German (Grice et al. 2005) 0% e.g., German (Grabe 1998)

1 This label was used to mark a lengthening of a High tone in Mongolian (Karlsson 2014). But in Cantonese, this symbol is used when a phrase ends with a High plateau.

High/Mid plateau : when an IP boundary stays mid after an earlier Mid tone target % (after H or !H) e.g., Dutch (Gussenhoven 2005) L% (after H- or !H-) e.g., English ToBI

Q: which tone label to use when a boundary tone target stays the same as that of the earlier tone, creating a High, Mid, or Low plateau? Please note that this is different from the case where an IP ends at a mid tone coming from a higher or lower tonal target (e.g., L+H* !H%).

Proposal: adopt the convention from German ToBI and use “-“ after the preceding tone target, i.e., H-% for a high plateau, !H-% for a mid plateau, and L-% for a low plateau.

This is because “0%” or “%” itself does not directly encode how the phrase ends. (Cf. “%” is used in Cantonese ToBI to mark a phrase-end with no extra tone, i.e., a phrase ending with a lexical tone and no boundary tone)

IP-initial boundary tones An IP-initial boundary tone can be realized locally on the IP-initial syllable as in English or on the IP-initial two syllables as in European Portuguese. This boundary tone affects the pitch of an IP contour only at the “beginning” of an IP, thus different from the case where the pitch of the whole IP is shifted. A tonal label for register shift is introduced in Section 1.4.

Low %L e.g., Bininj Gun-Wok (Bishop & Fletcher 2005); Dalabon (Fletcher 2014) High %H e.g., English; German; Dalabon; European Portuguese (Frota 20002)

In sum, four IP-final boundary tones (L%, H%, !H%, ¡H%) and two IP-initial boundary tones (%L, %H), and three IP-final plateau boundary tones (H-%, !H-%, L-%) are proposed.

1.2 Bitonal IP boundary tones A bitonal IP-final boundary tone can be realized either on the IP-final syllable (Bengali) or over postnuclear unstressed syllables at the end of an IP (e.g., Catalan). Here, a bitonal IP boundary tone (e.g., LH%) is a property of an IP, different from a combination of a phrase accent and an IP boundary tone (e.g., English L-H%, where a L- phrase accent is a property of an Intermediate Phrase and a H% is a property of an Intonational Phrase).

2 Frota (2003) shows that an IP phrasal tone, H, in European Portuguese is different from the boundary tone %H in that H is realized as pitch rise through the first syllable and the peak being attained in the second or third syllable within the first prosodic word of an IP. Full rising LH% e.g., Catalan (Prieto 2014); European Portuguese (Frota 2014); Bengali (Khan 2014); Tamil (Keane 2014); Korean; Dalabon; Basque; Japanese.

Mid rising L!H% e.g., Catalan (Prieto 2014)

Falling HL% e.g., Catalan (Prieto 2014); European Portuguese (Frota 2014); Bengali (Khan 2014); Georgian (Vicenik & Jun 2014); Korean; standard Basque (Elordieta & Hualde 2014); Serbo-Croatian (Godjevac 2005).

1.3 Multi-tonal IP boundary tones A multi-tonal IP boundary tone can be realized on the IP-final syllable as in monotonal boundary tones (e.g., Korean), or over postnuclear unstressed syllables (e.g., Catalan). rise-fall LHL% e.g., Catalan (Prieto 2014); Korean (Jun 2000, 2005); Mongolian (Karlsson 2014) fall-rise HLH% e,g., Bengali (Khan 2014); Korean rise-fall-rise LHLH% e.g., Korean (Jun 2000, 2005, Park 2003) rise-fall-rise-fall LHLHL% e.g., Korean (Jun 2000, 2005, Park 2003)

1.4 Register Shift at an IP level Unlike an IP-initial High boundary tone, the pitch range of a whole IP can be raised to mark a sentence type of yes/no-question as in Sotho-Tswana or some dialects of Spanish. Researchers working on these languages have used the label, %H, to illustrate this type of register shift, which could be mistaken as an IP-initial local High boundary.

%H e.g., Sotho-Tswana (Zerbian, to appear); Spanish (Sosa 1999, Alvord 2009).

Proposal: use %H-> to distinguish the register shift from the IP-initial High boundary and label it at the beginning of an IP.

Other labels related to pitch range modification have been used in contour tone languages. Examples are shown below, taken from Pan-Mandarin (Peng et al. 2005). But these labels are for pitch range modifications whose time domain is not a whole IP, but a small portion of an IP such as a focused word or a prominent word.

%q-raise : Raised pitch range for focus; labeled at the beginning of raised pitch range. %compressed : Reduction of pitch range after focus; labeled at the beginning of compressed pitch range. %e-prom : Pitch range expansion due to emphatic prominence; labeled at the beginning of local expansion of pitch range.

Proposal: use %H-> for higher pitch register shift for the whole IP, but for a local pitch range modification, use % and add a descriptive name of the event triggering the pitch range modification.

2. An Intermediate Phrase (ip)

An ip is a prosodic unit smaller than an IP but larger than an AP. It could have a phrase accent as in English, which is not necessarily realized on the ip-final syllable but realized over multiple syllables between the last pitch accented syllable/word and the final syllable of an ip. Or, an ip could have a boundary tone marking the end of an ip as in French (Delais-Roussarie et al. 2015) and Turkish (Ipek 2015, Ipek & Jun 2013) or the beginning of an ip as in Mongolian (Karlsson 2014). The ip-final syllable is often slightly lengthened (weaker degree of lengthening than IP-final lengthening). An ip is often the domain of focus and . Across languages that have an ip, the ip-initial boundary is less common.

2.1 ip-final boundary tone or an ip-level phrase accent

Low L- : commonly found in various languages High H- : commonly found in various languages Mid !H- e.g., German, Grice et al., 2005; Lebanese Arabic, Chahal & Hellmuth 2014 Rise LH- e.g., phrase accent in Serbo-Croatian (Godjevac 2005) Fall HL- e.g., phrase accent in Neapolitan Italian (D’Imperio 2001, Grice et al. 2005)

2.2 ip-initial boundary

Rise -LH e.g., Mogolian (Karlsson 2014)

In sum, an ip boundary tone is labeled with a “-“ diacritic. If the tone is an ip-final one, add “-“ after the tone symbol (e.g., L-, H-), but if it’s an ip-initial tone, add “-“ before the tone symbol (e.g., -LH). So far, only one ip-initial tone type has been reported (i.e., -LH) but more ip-initial tones such as –H might be found if more languages are examined.

3. An Accentual Phrase (AP)

An Accentual Phrase (AP) is a prosodic unit smaller than an ip but bigger than a PW. It typically includes one word but it can include two or more words if each word is short and they together form a syntactic/semantic constituent. In this sense, an AP is similar to a Phonological Phrase (PhP) which is often defined by a syntactic structure. An AP and a PhP often have a tonal melody, either rising (as in Bengali or Manado Malay) or rising-falling (as in Tokyo Japanese and Chonam Korean). Since these two are similar in size and their location in the prosodic hierarchy and no language shows a contrast between these two units, the term “AP” will be used to represent both units. The tonal melody of an AP is achieved by tones marking the beginning, or the end, or both edges of the unit or by a tonal melody spanning over the whole phrase. Typically, the tonal category of an AP-initial tone is the opposite of that of the AP-final tone. For example, when an AP-initial tone is L, either a L* pitch accent or a L boundary tone (labeled aL; ‘a’ refers to an AP), the final tone of the AP is H, either a H boundary tone (labeled as Ha) or a H* pitch accent. e.g., [L* Ha] as in Bengali AP or [aL H*] as in French AP. An AP can also have a phrasal tone which is realized on a specific location within an AP, but not on the edge of an AP (e.g., AP-phrasal H tone on its second mora as in Japanese, Basque, and Korean; AP-initial H on the content word initial or second syllable in French).

3.1 AP-initial boundary Low %L e.g., Japanese (Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986; Venditti 2005) aL e.g., French (Delais-Roussarie et al. 2015)

Q: which tone symbol to use? Proposal: use aL because %L can be mistaken as an IP-initial boundary tone. No data yet showing an AP-initial H boundary tone, but if it exists, it would be labeled as aH.

3.2 AP-final boundary Low L% e.g., Japanese, Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986; Venditti (2005) La e.g., Dalabon, Georgian, Korean (Chonnam dialect, Jun 1993)

Q: which tone symbol to use? Proposal: use La because L% can be mistaken as an IP-final boundary tone

High Ha e.g., Dalabon; Bengali; Georgian, Seoul Korean, Tamil

Proposal: Use La for AP-final L tone and Ha for AP-final High tone.

3.3 AP-medial phrasal tone (or phrase accent) Fall H+L e.g., Georgian phrase accent (Vicenik & Jun 2005) High H e.g., 2nd mora of an AP in Japanese; 2nd syllable of an AP in Korean; the initial syllable of an AP-initial content word in French

Proposal: AP-medial phrasal tones are labeled as a simple tone without any diacritics. A monotonal, H or L, or a bitonal, L+H or H+L

3.4 AP tonal melody rise-fall LHL e.g., Koriyama dialect of Japanese (Igarashi 2014) – captures a peaky H LHHL e.g., Chickasaw (Gordon 2005) – captures a high plateau

Q: How to label an AP-tonal melody? Proposal: a tonal melody can be reanalyzed as an edge tone and a phrase medial tone. So, for example, depending on the regularity of tone-syllable alignment, a LHL melody can be labeled as [aL H La] (when both AP-initial and -final tones are Low and an AP-medial tone is H) or [aL HLa] (when the AP-initial tone is Low and the AP-final tone is falling) or [aLH La] (when AP-initial tone is rising and AP-final tone is Low).

4. A Prosodic Word (PW)

A Prosodic Word can also be marked by a boundary tone on its left edge as in Turkish and Serbo-Croatian or marked by a tonal melody as in West. Greenlandic or some unaccented dialects of Japanese (i.e., [-lexical tone] & [-multiword AP] dialects in Igarashi’s typology of Japanese dialects; Igarashi 2014).

4.1 PW-initial boundary Low wL e.g., Turkish, Ipek & Jun (2013) %L e.g., Serbo-Croatian, Godjevac (2005)

Q: which tone symbol to use? Proposal: use wL because %L can be mistaken as an IP-initial L boundary tone

High %H e.g., Serbo-Croatian, Godjevac (2005) Q: should we use wH? %H can be mistaken as an IP-initial H boundary tone

4.2 PW-marking tonal melody HLH e.g, W. Greenlandic (Arnhold 2014); cf. in Nagano-Madson (1988), HL is analyzed as a word tone and the final H as a phrasal tone. LLH e.g., Kobayashi dialect of Japanese (Igarashi 2014) – this could be analyzed as the PW-initial L boundary tone and PW-final LH or H boundary tone.

Q: How to label a PW-tonal melody? Proposal: as in the AP-tonal melody, a PW-tonal melody can be reanalyzed as an edge tone and a word-medial tone depending on the tone-syllable alignment. For example, in Kobayashi Japanese, each word begins with a low tone and stays low until rising at the end of the word, so a LLH melody can be labeled as wL (PW-initial Low tone) and LHw (PW- final rising tone).

CITED REFERENCES

Alvord, S. (2009) Disambiguating declarative and interrogative meaning with intonation in Miami Cuban Spanish. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 28(2): 21-66.

Arnhold, Anja (2014) Prosodic structure and focus realization in West Greenlandic. In S-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 216-251.

Arvaniti, Amalia and Baltazani, Mary (2005). Greek ToBI. In S-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 84–117.

Chahal, Dana and Sam Hellmuth. 2014. The intonation of Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic. In S.- A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 365-404.

Delais-Roussarie, Elisabeth, Brechtje Post, Mathieu Avanzi, Carolin Buthke, Albert Di Cristo, Ingo Feldhausen, Sun-Ah Jun, Philippe Martin, Trudel Meisenburg, Annie Rialland, Rafèu Sichel- Bazin & Hi-Yon Yoo (2015), Developing a ToBI system for French. In Sónia Frota & Pilar Prieto (eds.), Intonational Variation in Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 63-100.

D’Imperio, Mariapaola (2001) Focus and Tonal Structure in Neapolitan Italian. Speech Communication, 33(4), 339-356.

Elordieta, G. & Hualde, J.I. (2014). “Intonation in Basque”, in Sun-Ah Jun (ed.) Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 405-463.

Estebas-Vilaplana, Eva & Prieto, Pilar (2010) Castilian Spanish Intonation. In Prieto, P. & Roseano, P. (eds.) Transcription of Intonation of the Spanish Language LINCOM Studies in . Pp. 17-48.

Fletcher, J. (2014) Intonation and in Dalabon. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 252-272.

Frota, Sónia (2000). Prosody and focus in European Portuguese. Phonological phrasing and intonation. New York: Garland Publishing.

Frota, Sónia (2014). The intonational phonology of European Portuguese. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 6–42.

Frota, S., D’Imperio, M., Elordieta, G., Prieto, P., & Vigário, M. (2007). The Phonetics and Phonology of Intonational Phrasing in Romance, in Prieto, P., Mascaró, J., & Solé, M.-J. (eds.), Prosodic and Segmental Issues in (Romance) Phonology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 131–53.

Frota, Sonia & Prieto, Pilar (2015). Intonation in Romance. Oxford University Press. Godjevac, Svetlana (2005). Transcribing Serbo-Croatian intonation. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology (2005), pp. 146–71.

Gooden, Shelome (2014) Aspects of the intonational phonology of Jamaican Creole. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 273-301.

Gordon, Matt (2005) Inotnational Phonology of Chickasaw. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 301-30.

Grice, Martine, Baumann, Stefan, and Benzmüller, Ralf (2005). German intonation in autosegmental-. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology (2005), pp. 55–83..

Grice, Martine, D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Michelina, Savino, and Avesani, Cinzia (2005) Strategies for Intonation Labelling across Varieties of Italian. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology (2005), pp. 362–389..

Gussenhoven, Carlos (2004) The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge Univ. Press.

Igarashi, Yosuke (2014) Typology of intonational phrasing in Japanese dialects. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.464-492.

Ipek, Canan (2015) The Phonology and Phonetics of Turkish Intonation, Ph.D dissertation, USC.

Ipek, Canan, and Jun, Sun-Ah (2013) Toward a Model of Intoantional Phonology of Turkish: Neutral Intonation, in the Acoustical Socity of America Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics (POMA), vol. 19, 060230

Jun, Sun-Ah (2000) “K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) labelling conventions: Version 3”, Speech Sciences, 7, 143-169. [Version 3.1 is published in UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics. 99: 149-173].

Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.) (2005). Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jun, Sun-Ah (2011) Prosodic markings of complex NP focus, syntax, and the Pre-/Post-focus string. In the Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL). Pp. 214-230. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings

Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.) (2014). Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Karlsson, A. (2014) The intonational phonology of Mongolian. In S.-A. Jun (ed.) Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 187-215.

Keane, E. (2014) The intonational phonology of Tamil. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 118-153. Khan, Sameer ud. D. (2014) The intonational phonology of Bangladeshi Standard Bengali. In S.- A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 81–117.

Ladd, Robert (1996/2008) Intonational Phonology. Cambridge University Press.

Nagano-Madson, Y. (1988) Phonetic reality of the mora in Eskimo, Working Papers 34, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics, 79-82.

Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene (1986) Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

Park, Mee-Jeong (2003) The Meaning of Korean Prosodic Boundary Tones. Ph.D dissertation, UCLA.

Peng, Shu-hui, Chan, Marjorie K., Tseing, Chiu-yu, Huang, Tsan, Lee, Ok Joo, & Beckman, Mary (2005) Towards a Pan-Mandarin system for prosodic transcription. In In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology (2005), pp. 230-270.

Prieto, Pilar (2014). The intonational phonology of Catalan. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 43–80.

Prieto, P. & Roseano, P. (2010) (eds.) Transcription of Intonation of the Spanish Language LINCOM Studies in Phonetics.

Sosa, Juan Manuel (1999) La entonación del español: su estructura fónica, variabilidad y dialectología. Madrid: Ediciones Cátedra.

Stoel, Ruben (2005a) Focus in Manado Malay: Grammar, Particles and Intonation. Leiden: CNWS Publications.

Stoel, Ruben (2005b) Particles and Intonation: The expression of information structure in Manado Malay. IIAS Newsletter #37-15.

Venditti, J. (2005) The J_ToBI Model of Japanese Intonation. In S.-A. Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 172- 200.

Vicenik, C. & S.-A. Jun (2014) An Autosegmental-metrical model of Georgian intonation. In Sun- Ah Jun (ed.) Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 154-186.

Wong, Wai Y. P., Chan, Marjorie K., & Beckman, Mary (2005) An Autosegmental-Metrical analysis and prosodic annotation conventions for Cantonese. In S.-A. Jun (2005) (ed.), pp. 271- 300.

Zerbian, Sabine (to appear) Sentence intonation in Sotho-Tswana. In Laura Downing and Annie Rialland (eds.) Intonation in African Languages, Mouton de Gruyter.