Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Claudia Kuzla Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Claudia Kuzla Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen"— Presentation transcript:

1 Prosody – a missing link between phonetic detail and phonemic categories?
Claudia Kuzla Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen Prosody – a missing link between phonetic detail and phonemic NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

2 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Prosodic Allophones Prosody influences phonetic detail: In prosodically prominent positions, speech sounds are articulated more strongly (e.g., Keating et al. 2003) Prosodic Phonology: Phonological processes occur within prosodic domains, but not across prosodic boundaries (Nespor & Vogel 1986) Q : How are phonemic contrasts affected by prosodic conditioning of phonetic detail? 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

3 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Prosodic Structure (Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986) 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

4 Prosody & Phonetic Detail
Articulatory & Acoustic Studies: “Domain-initial strengthening”  Segments at the beginning of higher prosodic domains are temporally and spatially expanded: Longer closure durations More linguo-palatal contact Longer Voice Onset Time Less coarticulation Less assimilation 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

5 The ‘Fortition’ Account
Early articulatory data: Segments get ‘stronger’ at higher prosodic boundaries. Sound change occurs first in prosodically weak positions. (Fougeron 1997) Q: Is a prosodically ‘weak’ [p] still different from a ‘strong’ [b] ? 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

6 The Feature Enhancement Account
English: Longer VOT at higher boundaries for all plosives Dutch: Shorter VOT at higher boundaries for voiceless plosives; more prevoicing for voiced plosives Enhancement of the features [+ spread glottis] (Engl.) vs. [-spread glottis] (Dutch)  Implementation of Prosodic Strengthening is language-specific (Cho & Jun 2000; Cho & McQueen 2005) 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

7 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Exp 1: German Plosives /b,p/ : Backen ‘bake’ – Packen ‘pack’ /d,t/ : Dank ‘thanks’– Tank ‘tank’ /g,k/: Garten ‘garden’ – Karten ‘cards’ …in sentence contexts, with various prosodic realizations… 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

8 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Speech Materials Am Samstag wollen wir backen und einkaufen. ‘On Saturday, we want to do baking and shopping.’ Geplant hatten wir, Backen und Einkauf zuerst zu machen. ‘Our plan was to do baking and shopping first.’ Einkaufen müssen wir, backen für morgen, und aufräumen. ‘We have to go shopping, bake for tomorrow, and tidy up.’ Heute segeln wir. Backen kann Anna. ‘Today we go sailing. Baking can be done by Anna.’ 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

9 Prosodic Boundary Categorization
Major Phrase: [+ Pause, + BoundaryTone] Minor Phrase: [- Pause, + BoundaryTone] Prosodic Word:[- Pause, - BoundaryTone] …supported by preboundary lengthening patterns: Major > Minor > Word 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

10 Acoustic Measurements
Closure duration [ms] Voice Onset Time [ms] Glottal Vibration in /b,d,g/ [% of closure] Burst Intensity Maximum for /p,t,k/ [dB] 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

11 Results: Closure duration
1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

12 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Results: VOT Wd > Minor > Major /k/ > /t/ > /p/ Wd = Minor = Major /g/ > /d/ > /b/ 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

13 Results: Glottal vibration /b,d,g/
Major (3.5 %) < Minor (32.2%) < Word (60.0%)  Against Feature Enhancement 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

14 Results: Burst Intensity Max /p,t,k/
Effect of PCat for /t/ and /k/ : /t/: Major < Word /k/: Major < {Minor = Word} [dB] /p/ /t/ /k/ Major 55.09 58.37 59.65 Minor 53.69 58.38 60.58 Word 54.22 59.18 61.53 Against predictions of both ‘Fortition’ and Feature Enhancement 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

15 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Summary Acoustic Cue Prosodic Effect Feature Enhancement Fortition Closure longer closures at higher boundaries VOT shorter VOT for /p,t,k/ at higher boundaries Glottal Vibration less at higher boundaries Burst Intensity If any: lower at higher boundaries 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

16 Exp 2: Voice Assimilation of Fricatives
Word-initial lenis fricatives /v,z/ may be devoiced if they follow /t/: /hAt vEld/ → [hAtvEld] ‘has forests’ /hAt zAnt/ → [hAtzAnt] ‘has sand’ /hAt fEld/ → [hAtfEld] ‘has fields’ Word-initial lax fricatives may be devoiced after voiceless sounds, as [velder] in the sequence in ‘hat velder’, or [sand] in ‘hat sand’. (click) This assimilation could make word recognition harder in the case of /v/, since there may be competing words beginning with /f/ (as in ‘hat felder’ - ‘has fields’), but not in case of /z/, since word-initial /s/ in German is phonotactically illegal. */hAt sAnt/ 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

17 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Predictions Contrast between /v, z/ and /f, s/ is not only cued by glottal vibration, but also by duration. Prosodic structure might influence exactly these two cues: - glottal vibration, due to effects on assimilation : more assimilatory devoicing across smaller boundaries - duration, due to initial strengthening: longer duration after larger boundaries 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

18 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Speech Materials /f,v,z/ in word-initial position: [f]elder ‘fields’ , [v]älder ‘forests’ , [z]enken ‘hollows’ Preceding context : // in hatte ‘had’ (non-assimilation context), /t/ in hat ‘has’ (assimilation context) Similar sentence sets as in Experiment 1: Anna hatte Felder und Wiesen gemalt. …Anna gemalt hat. Felder und Wiesen… Same prosodic categorization To investigate this interaction of sandhi, prosodic structure, and phonological contrasts, we first ran a production experiment. German speakers read various sentences which contained words beginning with the fricatives /f, v, z/ (as in ….). (click) The words occurred in two different contexts, a viable assimilation context “hat”, where we could expect devoicing, and a non-viable vocalic context “hatte”. (click) Since there is no one-to-one correspondence between syntax and prosody, Speakers did not receive any instructions concerning the prosodic phrasing of the sentences, but were asked to read them fluently, in a natural way. (click) The recordings were later prosodically classified with respect to the boundary size before the target word. 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

19 Results: Fricative duration
We measured the duration of the fricatives. Analyses showed that fricatives were longer after phrase boundaries than after word boundaries. These are the boxplots for /z/ and /v/ in the vocalic context, and the pattern in the assimilation context is the same. This is evidence for domain-initial prosodic strengthening. 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

20 Results: Glottal vibration (assimilation)
Second, we measured the period of glottal vibration during the lax fricatives in assimilation context. Here are plots of the percentage of vocal fold vibration during the fricatives. Both /z/ and /v/ were more devoiced across Word boundaries than across Phrase boundaries.This is an effect of prosodic structure on the assimilation. However, there is also a strong fricative effect: /z/ is assimilated to a greater extent than /v/. We attribute this difference to the fact that there is no phonemic contrast between /z/ and /s/, while complete devoicing of /v/ might increase its confusability with /f/ with respect to the glottal vibration cue. We also investigated whether the assimilation had an effect on the duration by itself. A strict phonological account (substitute /z/ by /s/, and /s/ is longer than /z/) suggests such an effect, but this was not the case. The duration results of assimilated /v/ and /z/ are the same as for the non-assimilated tokens. This suggests a trading relation between the acoustic cues to laxness : 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

21 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Summary Two important cues to the fortis-lenis distinction remain balanced across prosodic conditions: Phrase: longer duration -> more fortis /f/ less devoicing -> more lenis /v/ Word: shorter duration -> more lenis /v/ more devoicing -> more fortis /f/ 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody NVFW Seminar on Prosody, 1June 2007

22 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Conclusions Prosodic structure interacts with phonetic detail and phonemic categories in a complex way: Neither general ‘Fortition’ nor ‘Feature Enhancement’ through the Prosodic Hierarchy; Phonological contrasts are phonetically implemented in different ways for different prosodic positions. 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody

23 NVFW Seminar on Prosody
Thank you… … and Mirjam Ernestus Taehong Cho 1 June 2007 NVFW Seminar on Prosody


Download ppt "Claudia Kuzla Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google