There is no Post-focal De-phrasing in English

This paper studies the relationship between prosodic phrasing and prominence by addressing the questions of whether every prosodic phrase must have a head (a most prominent sub-constituent), and if so, how the head is marked. I study these questions by examining the intermediate phrase (iP) in English. If every iP must have a head, and this head must be marked by a pitch accent, then in an environment without any pitch accent, there should be no head/non-head distinction. And if there is no head, there should be no iP in this context either. I conducted a production study in English, and found durational evidence suggesting the presence of iP boundaries in an accent-less context. I also searched for durational evidence for iP-level prominence distinctions in this context, but here my results are mixed. One theoretical possibility that is compatible with my findings is that every phrase must have a head, but the head of an iP can be marked by something other than pitch accent, for example by phrasal stress.

‘Grandpa’ or ‘opera’? Production and perception of unstressed /a/ and /əʁ/ in German

In the description of German phonology, two distinct phonetic symbols are currently recommended for the transcription of the vowels [a] (a central low vowel, phonemically /a/) and [ɐ] (phonemically /əʁ/) in word-final, unstressed positions. The present study examines whether differences between these two vowels exist in production and perception of Standard German speakers from the north of Germany. In Experiment 1, six speakers produced a series of minimal pairs that were embedded in meaningful sentences and varied with respect to their accentuation and position within a prosodic phrase. In Experiment 2, the minimal pairs produced by the six speakers of the first experiment were extracted from their respective contexts and tested with 44 native German listeners in a forced-choice identification task. Perceptual results showed a better-than-chance performance for one male speaker of the corpus only. Phonetic analyses also confirmed that only this male speaker produced subtle, but consistent F2/F3 differences between [a] and [ɐ] while the contrast was completely neutralised in the rest of the corpus. We discuss the role of prosody in vowel neutralisation with a specific focus on unstressed vowels and make suggestions for phonetic and phonological accounts of Standard German.

Exploring the Similarity Between Implicit and Explicit Prosody: Prosodic Phrasing and Individual Differences

In recent years, work carried out in the context of the implicit prosody hypothesis (IPH) has called into question the assumption that implicit (i.e., silently generated) prosody and explicit (overtly produced) prosody are similar in form. Focusing on prosodic phrasing, the present study explored this issue using an individual differences approach, and using methods that do not rely on the sentence comprehension tests characteristic of work within the IPH program. A large group of native English speakers participated in a production experiment intended to identify individual differences in average prosodic phrase length, phonologically defined. We then explored whether these (explicit) prosodic differences were related to two other kinds of variation, each with a connection to implicit prosody. First, we tested whether individual differences in explicit prosodic phrase length were predicted by individual differences in working memory capacity, a relationship that has been established for implicit prosody. Second, we explored whether participants’ explicit prosodic phrase lengths were predictive of their behavior in a silent-reading task in which they had to identify their own implicit prosodic groupings. In both cases, the findings are argued to be consistent with a similarity between explicit and implicit prosody. First, participants with higher working memory capacity (as estimated by reading spans) were associated with longer prosodic phrases. Second, participants who produced longer explicit prosodic phrases in speech tended to report generating longer prosodic phrases in silent reading. Implications for the nature of implicit prosody, and how it can be studied, are discussed.

Reduction of word-final obstruent-liquid-schwa clusters in Parisian French

This corpus study investigated pronunciation variants of word-final obstruent-liquid-schwa (OLS) clusters in nouns in casual Parisian French. Results showed that at least one phoneme was absent in 80.7% of the 291 noun tokens in the dataset, and that the whole cluster was absent (e.g., [mis] for ministre) in no less than 15.5% of the tokens. We demonstrate that phonemes are not always completely absent, but that they may leave traces on neighbouring phonemes. Further, the clusters display undocumented voice assimilation patterns. Statistical modelling showed that a phoneme is most likely to be absent if the following phoneme is also absent. The durations of the phonemes are conditioned particularly by the position of the word in the prosodic phrase. We argue, on the basis of three different types of evidence, that in French word-final OLS clusters, the absence of obstruents is mainly due to gradient reduction processes, whereas the absence of schwa and liquids may also be due to categorical deletion processes.

Instruction Task for Malay Phrase Boundary Annotation

The paper presents a refined instruction task to assist evaluation of prosodic phrase (PPh) boundaries by naive listeners. The results from the perceptual experiments were compared to the boundaries produced by online automatic tagger. The Kappa evaluation shows the average of 85% on inter-rater agreement. More than 60% of the boundaries which are detected by the automatic tagger matched the reference boundaries, showing that the refined instruction task can be used to evaluate perception on phrase boundaries on continuous speech.

Focus prosody in Japanese reconsidered

Japanese is a pitch accent language where lexical items are divided into two groups: Accented (A) and Unaccented (U). Previous studies suggest that, for A words, focus boosts the pitch of the accent peak and triggers either compression of the pitch range and/or Downstep in the post-focal domain, but they are not clear on how focus on U words is implemented. The purpose of the paper is to examine how focus in Japanese is realized and perceived in various accentual conditions by production and perception experiments which tightly controlled the focus status and accent status of word pairs. We predict that, similar to focus on A words, focused U words will be endowed with F0 Rise and Post-focal Fall, and listeners can identify focus with high accuracy. Our results show that U words have the focal characteristics of F0 Rise and Post-focal Fall, but failed to show up constantly in all sequences considered, which leads to a significant difference in perception between the focus on U words and the one on A words. There are controversies over whether focus builds its own independent prosodic phrase in the Japanese literature. If focus necessarily initiates a new Phonological (Major) Phrase, we would not expect such murky results as ours, so we should conclude that focus does not initiate a new prosodic category, which accords with Ishihara (2003) and others.