Methods for defining categories in intonational phonology: A check on Italian data - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Methods for defining categories in intonational phonology: A check on Italian data PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: d5032-NWUxM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Methods for defining categories in intonational phonology: A check on Italian data

Description:

intonation 'involves the occurrence of pitch patterns, each of which is used ... intonation features have no intrinsic meaning, its semantics may be related to ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:47
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 55
Provided by: barbaragi
Learn more at: http://prosodia.upf.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Methods for defining categories in intonational phonology: A check on Italian data


1
Methods for defining categories in intonational
phonology A check on Italian data
  • Barbara Gili Fivela
  • Università del Salento Lecce, Italy
  • CRIL Centro di Ricerche Interdisciplinare sul
    Linguaggio
  • barbara.gili_at_ateneo.unile.it

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona - May the
14th 2007
2
Overview
  • Introduction
  • Linguistics and paralinguistics
  • Intonation, meaning and categories
  • Methods for defining categories in intonation
  • Italian data production and perception
  • Production, perception, and perception-production
  • Different constraints in production and
    perception?
  • Categorical perception in intonation

3
Prosody and intonation
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Prosody is due to variation in
  • fundamental frequency (F0)-pitch
  • duration-length
  • intensity-loudness
  • speech tempo / speech rate
  • rhythm
  • Intonation Ladd, 1996
  • suprasegmental F0, intensity, duration
  • conveying meaning to phrases/utterances
  • organized in terms of categorically distinct
    entities and relations

4
Linguistics and paralinguistics
  • Linguistics the scientific study of language
    Crystal, 91
  • Paralinguistics independent from the linguistic
    messagealthough it is coordinated in time with
    the linguistic channel and influences the
    interpretation of the utterance Ladd, 1996 34
  • Interaction (solidarity, aggression)
  • speakers attitude
  • Emotions (fear, surprise)
  • intonation clearly feels paralinguistic
    Ladd, 1996 38
  • same features used for paralinguistic change
    (e.g.,voice quality)
  • over long stretches of speech (e.g. loudness)
  • affective and interpersonal meaning (e.g. doubt,
    irony)
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

5
Linguistics and paralinguistics in
phonology/phonetics
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Linguistics categorical distinction
  • Paralinguistics gradual changes
  • Segmental level
  • /i/ vs. /u/ ex.it. mito vs. muto sp. si vs.
    su
  • /i/ vs. /i/ produced while smiling
  • Suprasegmental level
  • Truth value of the utterance
  • ex. In Saint Petersburg, OFFICERS always
    escort ballerinas
  • Rooth, 1985
  • Sentence modality
  • ex. it. vai vs. vai?
  • ex. cat. volen una nena vs. volen una nena?
  • ..produced for conveying surprise

6
Intonational meaning
  • British tradition
  • functional units, such as head, nucleus, tail
    Palmer, 1922
  • intonation involves the occurrence of pitch
    patterns, each of which is used with a set of
    relatively constant meaning, either on single
    words or on groups of words Cruttenden, 19869
  • IPO approach
  • pitch movements, defined through perceptual
    equivalence, combined according to a grammar of
    intonation in configurations and contours t
    Hart and Collier, 1990
  • intonation features have no intrinsic meaning,
    its semantics may be related to syntax, in
    cases of ambiguity resolution id.
  • Autosegmental theories
  • sequences of L and H tone targets, belonging to
    pitch accents and edge tones Bruce, 1977
    Pierrehumbert, 1980
  • pitch accents and edge tones convey both
    linguistic and paralinguistic meaning
    Pierrehumbert and Hirschberg ,90 Kohler,91
    Ladd,96 Gussenhoven,04
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

7
Intonation conveys linguistic and paralinguistic
meaning
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • The meaning of intonation is considered as a way
    to shed light on its form Ladd,1996 98
  • linguistic entities
  • paralinguistic cues imply modification of the way
    phonological categories are realized

8
Intonation conveys linguistic and paralinguistic
meaning - II
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Tune-based analysis and tone-based analysis
  • Meaning conveyed by the whole contour
  • Liberman and Sag, 1974
  • Meaning derived from contours components
  • Pierrehumbert and Hirschberg, 1990
  • Changes in the form of intonation
  • Implying a change in category
  • Gradual, for signalling paralinguistic changes
  • Due to phonetic implementation
  • Problems with paralinguistic variation
  • High-fall vs. low-fall treated as contrasting in
    some analysis and as paralinguistic variants in
    others OConnor and Arnold, 1973 vs.
    Crystal, 1969
  • Gradient form-meaning relations may be
    grammaticalized as discrete Gussenhoven, 2002

9
Biological codes
  • Frequency code Ohala, 1983 Gussenhoven, 2002
  • Differences due to phonatory system
  • low dominant-self confidence-assertive mode
  • Grammaticalization statement vs. questions
  • Effort code Gussenhoven, 2002
  • Differences due to effort in production
  • High important-surprise-emphasis-focus
  • Grammaticalization focus
  • Production code Gussenhoven, 2002
  • Differences due to energy dissipation
  • Lowering end of constituent finality
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

10
Which information are expressed by categorical
elements?
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Accentuation, focus, phrase signals for
    indicating sentence modality, function and
    meaning
  • statement, yn-question DImperio and House,
    1997
  • yn- and wh-question, check, focus, continuation
    Cruttenden, 1986, Pierrehumbert and Beckman,
    1986, Casper, 1998
  • check, query and accessibility Grice and Savino,
    2003
  • introducing, committing to presence, and
    selecting from background Gussenhoven, 1984
  • new, salient, linked to mutual believes, to be
    interpreted with the following Pierrehumbert,
    Hirschberg,90
  • finality-knowing, openess-realizing Kohler,
    1987 1991
  • direct, indirect speech acts Liberman and Sag,
    1974 1975
  • topic and comment Cresti, 2000

11
and by gradient variations?
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Emotions, attitude
  • Perception of paralinguistic form-function
    relation is influenced by subjects background
    Chen, 2005
  • Degrees of meaning related to the linguistic unit
  • Openess-realizing and unexpectedness-opposing
    Kohler, 1991 2006
  • Neutral statement and contraddiction
  • Ladd and Morton, 1997
  • two different meanings, categorically perceived
  • Variations in
  • pitch range, i.e. scaling of targets on the
    frequency scale
  • alignment, i.e. synchronization with segmental
    chain

12
Where do categories usually come from?
  • Production
  • categories defined on the basis of speech
    recordings read and (semi)spontaneous speech
  • Perception
  • categories defined on the basis of perception
    experiments IPO approach
  • Production and perception
  • Patterns observed in production
  • Perception of different categories checked by
    means of perception experiments
  • Semantic contrast is no longer sufficient to
    proof a structural difference
  • Kohler, 1991 Ladd and Morton, 1997
    Gussenhoven, 2006
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

13
Intonational and categorical
  • In intonation
  • contrast both discrete and gradient
  • categorical discrete
  • linguistic categorical
  • Production and perception mismatch
  • Production data suggest syllable onset as
    reference point for alignment Caspers and van
    Heuven, 1992 van Santen and Möbius, 2000
  • Ladd 1999 segmental anchoring hypothesis,
    but see data discussed in the literature Prieto
    and Torreira, in print Loevenbruck and Welby, in
    print Gili Fivela, 2004
  • Perception data point to vowel onset as crucial
    for tone comparison House, 1990113
  • Perceptual and acoustic tonal targets DImperio,
    2000
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

14
Perception and categorical
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Problems with methods for testing (categorical)
    perception?
  • Even in situations where subjects can make sharp
    distinctions between classes, they are still able
    to discriminate within a class Ladd and
    Morton, 1997
  • The ideal experiment observes the subjects
    behaviour in a situation as close to natural
    conversation as possible Kochanski, 2006

15
Linguistic and categorical
  • Kohler 2006 observes that according to some
    theories of intonational meaning
  • Linguistically relevant elements are discrete and
    categorical
  • Categories of intonation have to be distinguished
    from paralinguistic modifications
  • Only categories are linguists concern
  • Analyses of communicative functions and meanings
  • few meanings in the linguistic domain
    (accentuation, focus, phrasing, sentence
    modality)
  • intonation is mainly concerned with paralanguage
    (expressive and attitudinalinteractive speaker
    evaluation of events - finality, openess style)
  • -gt Categorical perception in the classical sense
    is therefore a special case and not essential for
    pitch categorization
  • (see also Newport 1982)
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

16
Methods for defining categories Production
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Speech recordings, both monologues and dialogues
  • read speech, proposing specific functions
  • (semi)spontaneous speech obtained by means of
    various tasks
  • e.g., map-task, card games
  • Analysis of F0 tracks, in relation to segmental
    events
  • Invariant tonal events, independent of phonetic
    modifications
  • The ideal general methodology would then be
    some kind of cyclicity between test material and
    spontaneous speech using feedback from preceding
    studies Bruce and Touati, 1990.

17
Methods for defining categories Perception - I
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Perceptual equivalence t Hart and Collier,
    1990
  • Structural discreteness tested by means of
    speaker
  • intuition of perceptual equality, i.e. passable
    imitations
  • of each other
  • passable imitation Odé, 2005 Gussenhoven,
    2006
  • Categorical perception Repp, 1984 Gussenhoven,
    1999
  • Identification task
  • continuum between two phonological categories
  • stimuli are assigned to either category
  • abrupt shift
  • Discrimination task
  • pairs of stimuli to be judged same or
    different
  • expected grater distinction across perceptual
    boundary

18
Categorical perception
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

CAT I CAT II
Continuum of stimuli
19
Methods for defining categories Perception - II
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Perceptual magnet effect Kuhl, 1991 Schneider
    et al., 2006
  • each category has a prototype
  • lower discrimination sensitivity for its
    neighbours
  • Identification task
  • Goodness rating
  • rating as for very bad/very good exemplar
  • individuation of the prototype
  • Discrimination task
  • prototype and (not necessarily adjacent)
    neighbour
  • Semantic difference and scaling Gussenhoven,
    1999
  • Gradient and categorical judgments on the
    presence of a meaning or its opposite (Grabe
    1997 for discussion)
  • Judgement on the extent to which a meaning is
    conveyed - especially for paralinguistic
  • On rating scales, see Chen 2005 Rietveld and
    Chen 2006

20
Methods for defining categories Perception - III
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Imitation Pierrehumbert and Steele, 1989
    Gussenhoven, 1999
  • continuum between two patterns
  • subjects are asked to imitate each stimulus,
    paying attention to the intonation pattern
  • in case they produce the whole continuum, the
    difference is gradient in case of binomial
    distribution it is categorical
  • correcting not acceptable patterns
    Gussenhoven, 2006
  • imitation of their own imitation Brown et al.,
    2006 Kochanski, 2006

21
Check on Italian data Pisa Italian
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Production
  • Read speech
  • out of the blue
  • within context utterances
  • (Semi)spontaneous
  • Map-Task
  • Perception
  • Perceptual equivalence
  • Passable imitation
  • Categorical perception
  • Perceptual magnet effect
  • Semantic difference and scaling
  • Imitation

22
Production
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Inventory of Pisa Italian tonal events Gili
    Fivela, 2004
  • Functions
  • wh-question query-wh
  • yn-question query-yn, checks and align
  • statements instruct
  • focalization
  • Structurally distinct units
  • three types of nuclear pitch accents H, HL,
    HL
  • edge tones L-L, H-L, L-H, H-H

23
Examples
wh-question
H HL
L-L
e dove dev(o)
andare ?
and where should I
go ?
yn-question / check

HL H-L
hai detto
leggimelo ?
did you say
read it to me?
24
Examples
statement
HL L- HL L-L H
HL L-L
Allora ripartiamo riparti
dalla partenza
then lets start again
you begin from the start
statement narrow focus
LHL L-L
saràltaagt un
centimetro
it will be a
centimeter
25
Production categories and meaning
  • Meaning of pitch accents difficult to delimit
  • pitch accents are be shared by different
    functions
  • more than one pitch accent type may be exploited
    for a specific function
  • depending on pragmatic variation
  • general meaning, coherently with literature
  • Analysis of contrasting characteristics lead to
    the choice of transparent, either abstract or
    detailed, labels
  • emphasizing the structurally distinctive
    characteristics
  • differentiating shared and dissimilar structural
    properties
  • low target point as starting point of a rise to H
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

26
Examples
Mangia il melone ()
s/he eats the mellon
statement broad focus utterance final
HL L-L
statement contrastive focus utterance final
LHL L-L
statement broad focus utterance initial
/ (narrow focus)
LH L-
27
Pitch accents under investigation
  • Gili Fivela, 2002

C
La pronuncia di lavaglielo
non (la) ricordo mai The pronunciation
of lavaglielo I never remember (it)
B
28
Perception Pitch accents under investigation
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Measurements of F0, latencies between targets and
    segmental points showed that the accents differ
    as for
  • target alignment L H L
    HL
  • ms
  • target scaling
  • Hz
  • syllable duration
  • ms

29
Acoustic manipulation
  • Difference of mean values
  • Number of steps for gradually getting from one
    pattern to the other one
  • 8 alignment steps 15 ms
  • 2 scaling steps 13Hz(L) - 17Hz(H) - 6 Hz(L)
  • 5 repetitions
  • PRAAT PSOLA resynthesis
  • Perceval (Aix-en-Provence) for perception test
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

30
Perception of peak accents
Gili Fivela, 2005
  • Identification test, manipulating the alignment
    and scaling characteristics of stimuli 10
    subjects
  • No. Ho detto velava velocemente
  • I said velava quickly
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

Alignment
Scaling
  • Is it a peremptory and
  • conclusive correction?
  • Stimuli are ambiguous as
  • for pitch height
  • Pitch height has a significant
  • influence on perception

31
Summing up peak accents
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • In identifying two peak accents,
  • S-shaped plots in relation to alignment
  • but there was always an ambiguous pitch height
    value
  • Extremes are categorically perceived
  • Pitch height has an influence on when a
    different pattern is perceived
  • Discrimination task would be needed
  • best with no ambiguous cues

32
Peak accents attention to cues
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • In the identification test
  • subjects appear to rely on different cues

Align
PitchRange
33
Imitation task
  • Imitation of same stimuli
  • (same steps of manipulation)
  • contrastive base, 3 subj
  • Stimulus
  • say number - beep
  • target imitation
  • Measurements of (L)HL target
  • height and latencies vowel onset-to-H
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

34
Examples
Mangia il melone ()
s/he eats the mellon
statement broad focus utterance final
HL L-L
statement contrastive focus utterance final
LHL L-L
statement broad focus utterance initial
/ (narrow focus)
LH L-
35
Perception Pitch accents under investigation-II
  • Absence/presence of a (close) low target
    preceding a rise to peak
  • Measurements of F0, latencies between targets and
    segmental points showed that the accents differ
    as for
  • target alignment HL
    L HL
  • ms
  • target scaling
  • Hz
  • syllable duration
  • ms
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

36
Acoustic manipulation
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Difference of mean values
  • Number of steps for gradually getting from the
    broad focus pattern to the contrastive one
  • 5 alignment steps 22 ms
  • 4 scaling steps 15 Hz ( 1 step 7.5 Hz)
  • 3 repetitions PRAAT (PSOLA) Perceval

37
Perception of falling accents
Gili Fivela, 2006
  • Identification test, manipulating the alignment
    and scaling characteristics, from a broad
    stimulus 10 subj
  • Mangia il melone
  • s/he eats the mellon
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

Alignment
Scaling
  • Does it correct a
  • preceeding utterance?
  • Stimuli are ambiguous as
  • for pitch height
  • Pitch height has a small
  • influence on perception

38
Falling accents attention to cues
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • In the identification test
  • subjects appear to rely on different cues

FV
MA
Align
PitchRange
39
Is there a base effect ?
  • Identification test, manipulating the alignment
    and scaling characteristics, from a contrastive
    stimulus
  • 12 subjects
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

Alignment
Scaling
  • No S-shaped plot
  • Stronger influence of
  • pitch height
  • Extremes are
  • categorically perceived

40
Summary and comments
  • In identifying two falling accents,
  • No S-shaped plots in relation to alignment
  • but there was always an ambiguous pitch height
    value
  • not even categorically perceived (broad base)
  • Pitch height alone has an influence, at least
    when a contrastive base is considered
  • other correlates? Syllable duration?
  • Possible reasons for these results
  • Ambiguity in function or meaning?
  • Same phonological categories
  • not gradient variation in production
  • coherent, at least partly, with Gussenhovens
    hypothesis
  • Not appropriated task
  • more articulated context question-answer
    sequence?
  • sentence modality question (check) vs statement?

  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

41
What about a different task ? Question-answer
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Identification test, from both broad and
    contrastive base 11/12 subjects
  • Sequence of question-answer
  • Broad context broad focus answer expected
  • Cosa succede whats up?
  • Is the answer adeguated to the question?
  • Same results !

Broad focus base
Contrastive focus base
42
What about a different task ? Is it a question?
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Identification test, from broad base - 13
    subjects
  • Utterance in isolation
  • Need to set up a quite complex context based on
    mutual believes
  • Could you interpret it as a check of information?
    Would you give a yes/no answer?
  • Subjects were
  • actually giving
  • answers that were
  • exactly the opposit
  • of expected ones !
  • Too difficult task

43
Imitation task
  • Imitation of same stimuli
  • (same steps of manipulation)
  • contrastive base 3 subj
  • Stimulus - beep -
  • imitation say a number -
  • target imitation
  • Measurements of (L)HL target height and
    latencies syllable onset-to-H

ILL
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

NI
IL
44
Discrimination falling accents
  • Pairs AB and AA
  • B with either higher or later peak Ladd and
    Morton, 1997
  • From both broad and contrastive base
  • Same or different?
  • 9 subjects
  • No discrimination !
  • Reaction times give no information
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

discrimination scores
reaction times
45
discrimination scores
  • IL

NI
reaction times
NI
IL
IL
46
Summary
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Production data quite straightforwardly showed
    the existence of (patterns) pitch accents related
    to functions/meanings
  • Perception data seem to be far more problematic
  • Reason may be that they have being investigated
    teasing alignment and scaling apart
  • In any case, the H vs HL contrast appears to
    be perceptually more different that the HL HL
    contrast
  • Probably only one phonological distinction

47
Summary
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Two peak accents LH vs LHL
  • S-shaped identification results
  • but not all speakers appear to pay attention to
    the same cues
  • Extremes are correctly identified
  • 2 out of three speakers appears to perform the
    imitation task
  • They both imitate the continuum by creating two
    different classes as for the peak distance to
    vowel onset

48
Summary
  • Two falling accents LHL vs HL
  • No S-shaped identification results
  • and not all speakers appear to pay attention to
    the same cues
  • Extremes are correctly identified
  • 2 out of three speakers appears to perform the
    task
  • One speaker creates two different classes as for
    the peak alignment
  • One speaker creates a continuum of alignment
    differences
  • Raction times, in general, give no information,
    but
  • looking at the discriminator speaker Trend in
    the direction of categorical peak and coherent
    information for reaction time
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

49
Improvements
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion
  • Methods could be improved
  • Gussenhoven proposal of passable imitation
  • Perceptual Magnet Effect rather than traditional
    CP, in particular for the discrimination task
  • Experiments to be runned without teasing apart
    correlates

50
Examples
Mangia il melone ()
s/he eats the mellon
statement broad focus utterance final
HL L-L
statement contrastive focus utterance final
LHL L-L
statement broad focus utterance initial
/ (narrow focus)
LH L-
51
Discussion
  • Problem due to the form of intonation
  • especially in the second sets of experiments,
    pitch accents were formally really different
  • Proportional change of all the features needed
  • The resynthesis of continua is reasonable to
    apply for similar patterns
  • Problem due to meaning/function of intonation
  • general meanings
  • functions expressed by the same pitch accent
  • Both production and perception should be taken
    into consideration in deciding whether there is a
    contrast
  • Production could be more robust than perception
  • need of producing redundant features
  • perception within the context of strictly
    linguistic message
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

52
and discussion
  • Phonological perception should say something on
    the properties of phonic chain
  • However intonation has also being described in
    terms of morphemes
  • Morphemes
  • have meanings
  • may select different meaning of a base (message?)
  • among their meanings, one may be selected
    depending on the base (message?)
  • Intonational units have a meaning/function even
    though they are not categorically perceived ?
  • Introduction
  • Meaning and
  • Categories
  • Methods
  • Check on
  • Italian
  • Production
  • Perception
  • Discussion

53
  • If a language does not show a contrast that is
    adapt for perceptual testing,
  • does it really mean that the language does not
    exploit a/that phonological contrast?

In Saint Petersburg, OFFICERS always escort
ballerinas
or In Saint Petersburg, officers always
escort BALLERINAS
  • .in Pisa as well

54
THANK YOU!
About PowerShow.com