Pitch range use in speech of Welsh/English bilinguals: Production Study Mikhail Ordin 1,2 Ineke Mennen 1 (1 Bangor University, Centre for Research on Bilingualism.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Standard Dutch investigation ▪ Hanssen, Peters, Gussenhoven 2007: Adjustment strategies in IP-final nuclear contours (Fall, Rise, and Fall-Rise) with decreasing.
Advertisements

Phonetics as a scientific study of speech
Page 1. Page 2 Virtual Speaker: A Virtual Studio The software: Virtual Speaker is a package that automatically creates your voice files, prompts or any.
Tone perception and production by Cantonese-speaking and English- speaking L2 learners of Mandarin Chinese Yen-Chen Hao Indiana University.
The Role of F0 in the Perceived Accentedness of L2 Speech Mary Grantham O’Brien Stephen Winters GLAC-15, Banff, Alberta May 1, 2009.
Bilingualism, intelligence, transfer, and learning strategies
Voice quality variation with fundamental frequency in English and Mandarin.
ACOUSTICS OF SPEECH AND SINGING MUSICAL ACOUSTICS Science of Sound, Chapters 15, 17 P. Denes & E. Pinson, The Speech Chain (1963, 1993) J. Sundberg, The.
1 The Effect of Pitch Span on the Alignment of Intonational Peaks and Plateaux Rachael-Anne Knight University of Cambridge.
An investigation of cross-language differences in pitch range for speakers of English and German Ineke Mennen*, Felix Schaeffler#, & Gerard Docherty^ *ESRC.
INTONATION Chapters 15 & 16.
Spoken Language Analysis Dept. of General & Comparative Linguistics Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Oliver Niebuhr 1 At the Segment-Prosody.
Prosodics, Part 1 LIN Prosodics, or Suprasegmentals Remember, from our first discussions in class, that speech is really a continuous flow of initiation,
Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Prominence Rachael-Anne Knight Prosody and Pragmatics 15 th November 2003.
Perception of syllable prominence by listeners with and without competence in the tested language Anders Eriksson 1, Esther Grabe 2 & Hartmut Traunmüller.
Analyzing Students’ Pronunciation and Improving Tonal Teaching Ropngrong Liao Marilyn Chakwin Defense.
Niebuhr, D‘Imperio, Gili Fivela, Cangemi 1 Are there “Shapers” and “Aligners” ? Individual differences in signalling pitch accent category.
Prosodic Signalling of (Un)Expected Information in South Swedish Gilbert Ambrazaitis Linguistics and Phonetics Centre for Languages and Literature.
Investigating The Voice. The voice follows the rules of physics… The pitch of a vocal sound is affected by the air pressure in the lungs, length and tension.
VOICE CONVERSION METHODS FOR VOCAL TRACT AND PITCH CONTOUR MODIFICATION Oytun Türk Levent M. Arslan R&D Dept., SESTEK Inc., and EE Eng. Dept., Boğaziçi.
Analysis and Synthesis of Shouted Speech Tuomo Raitio Jouni Pohjalainen Manu Airaksinen Paavo Alku Antti Suni Martti Vainio.
Vocal Emotion Recognition with Cochlear Implants Xin Luo, Qian-Jie Fu, John J. Galvin III Presentation By Archie Archibong.
Voice Onset Time as a Parameter for Identification of Bilinguals Claire Gurski University of Western Ontario London, ON Canada.
Voice source characterisation Gerrit Bloothooft UiL-OTS Utrecht University.
Basic Data Analysis for Quantitative Research
Using Creaky Voice Index in Forensic Phonetics – Is it valid and is it reliable? ____________________________ Tuija Niemi-Laitinen Forensic Scientist/Technical.
Today Speaker Variable: Gender
GABRIELLA RUIZ LING 620 OHIO UNIVERSITY Cross-language perceptual assimilation of French and German front rounded vowels by novice American listeners and.
Review I volunteer in my son’s 2nd grade class on library day. Each kid gets to check out one book. Here are the types of books they picked this week:
Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Bosch, L. (2009) Developmental shift in the discrimination of vowel contrasts in bilingual infants: is the distributional account.
Experiments concerning boundary tone perception in German 3 rd Workshop of the SPP-1234 Potsdam, 7 th January 2009 Presentation of the Stuttgart Project.
Independent samples- Wilcoxon rank sum test. Example The main outcome measure in MS is the expanded disability status scale (EDSS) The main outcome measure.
Perceived prominence and nuclear accent shape Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 5 th September 2003.
Una Y. Chow Stephen J. Winters Alberta Conference on Linguistics November 1, 2014.
MUSIC 318 MINI-COURSE ON SPEECH AND SINGING
Evidence Based Medicine
Intonation and Meaning Doctorat en Ciència Cognitiva i Llenguatge Pilar Prieto, ICREA-UAB.
Male Cheerleaders and their Voices. Background Information: What Vocal Folds Look Like.
Acoustic Cues to Laryngeal Contrasts in Hindi Susan Jackson and Stephen Winters University of Calgary Acoustics Week in Canada October 14,
Evaluating prosody prediction in synthesis with respect to Modern Greek prenuclear accents Elisabeth Chorianopoulou MSc in Speech and Language Processing.
MGT-491 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FOR MANAGEMENT OSMAN BIN SAIF Session 26.
The Effect of Pitch Span on Intonational Plateaux Rachael-Anne Knight University of Cambridge Speech Prosody 2002.
Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning Chapter 10 Inferential Statistics.
Basic Data Analysis for Quantitative Research Copyright © 2010 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Performance Comparison of Speaker and Emotion Recognition
2.3 Markedness Differential Hypothesis (MDH)
IMPORTANCE OF STATISTICS MR.CHITHRAVEL.V ASST.PROFESSOR ACN.
T-test ● Are the scores from two groups really different?
Biostatistics Nonparametric Statistics Class 8 March 14, 2000.
Nuclear Accent Shape and the Perception of Syllable Pitch Rachael-Anne Knight LAGB 16 April 2003.
Intonation Lecture 11.
Language and Speech, 2000, 43 (2), THE BEHAVIOUR OF H* AND L* UNDER VARIATIONS IN PITCH RANGE IN DUTCH RISING CONTOURS Carlos Gussenhoven and Toni.
HYPOTHESIS TESTING FOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEANS AND BETWEEN PROPORTIONS.
Quantitative methods and R – (2) LING115 December 2, 2009.
 Kolmogor-Smirnov test  Mann-Whitney U test  Wilcoxon test  Kruskal-Wallis  Friedman test  Cochran Q test.
Inferential Statistics Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şehnaz Şahinkarakaş.
Inferential Statistics
The Human Voice. 1. The vocal organs
August 15, 2008, presented by Rio Akasaka
Laryngeal correlates of the English tense/lax vowel contrast
Non-Parametric Tests 12/1.
Experimental Design-Chapter 8
Non-Parametric Tests 12/6.
The Human Voice. 1. The vocal organs
Non-Parametric Tests.
Voice source characterisation
Brain Responses in 4-Month-Old Infants Are Already Language Specific
Jessica McKee Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences
Scottish Health Survey What we know so far
Brain Responses in 4-Month-Old Infants Are Already Language Specific
Presentation transcript:

Pitch range use in speech of Welsh/English bilinguals: Production Study Mikhail Ordin 1,2 Ineke Mennen 1 (1 Bangor University, Centre for Research on Bilingualism 2 Moscow Academy of Humanities and Technology)

Pitch range Level (Ladd 1996) Register (Cruttenden 1997) Overall height of speaker’s voice Span (Ladd 1996) Key (Cruttenden 1997) Excursion size (‘tHart, Collier, Cohen 1990) Range of frequencies covered by the speaker

Hypothetical averaged data for 4 target points in three speaker's pronunciation of the English declarative sentence I HAVE BEEN THERE BEFORE. The contours are impressionistically similar, despite the differences in level and span

Are overall pitch modifications automatic or consciously controlled?

Anatomical and physiological factors determine pitch range -Size of the larynx and lung volume -Decrease in transglottal pressure towards the end of the utterance -More difficult adjustments for upward pitch change than for downward pitch change -Increase of vocal folds tension on high vowels - Higher subglottal pressure before closure release on voicelss plosives than on voiced plosives

Anatomically-conditioned modifications can become meaningful and even undergo grammaticalization and express linguistic function (Ohala 1983, 1984; Lieberman 1967)

Biological codes (Gussenhoven 2004): 1) Frequency code (Ohala 1983, 1996) Source: size of the speech organs What is affected: overall level Paralinguistic meaning: submissive aggressive; big-small; friendly-hostile; high status-low status; certain-uncertain Linguistic meaning: Question vs. statement

Biological codes (Gussenhoven 2004): 2) Effort code Source: energy What is affected: span Paralinguistic meaning: affected-non affected speech Linguistic meaning: focus marking

Biological codes (Gussenhoven 2004): 3) Production code Source: lung volume What is affected: downtrends Linguistic meaning: finality vs continuity, old vs new information

Diehl (1991) and Kingston and Diehl (1994) argued that at least partially pitch modifications are under speaker’s conscious control and can be used to enhance perceptual effect.

Language-specific vs universal 1)HTR (e.g. Grabe, 2004) 2)Hadding-Koch and Stuttert-Kennedy, )Gonnum, )Brouwer, )Ohara, )Eckert, Laver, )Downing, )Gibbon, )Makarova, )Mennen, 2007, 2008

Pitch range in bilingual speech Mennen 2007, 2008, 2009 as the starting point of the current research. Mennen et.al. found that: The difference in pitch range between German and English monolingual speakers is mostly in span. L2 native German speakers of English use pitch range in English differently from native Brits. German manipulate level. In perception the cue to Englishness for the Brits is span, and for the German is level.

Simultaneous vs Sequencial Bilinguals Sequential Pitch range differs between L1 and L2 Pitch range in L2 of sequential bilinguals differs from that in monolingual speech by native speakers Are we dealing with cross- language differences or cross-context differences? Simultaneous ????????????????

Research Question 1: Do Welsh-English bilinguals realize pitch range differently when they use different languages?

Research Question 2: If so, what dimension(s) of pitch range (i.e. level/span) is/are language-specific?

Research Question 3: Which strategy or strategies do the bilinguals use to make the difference in pitch range?

Subjects: Adult bilinguals Acquired both languages simultaneously Used both languages daily Are fluent readers of technical and colloquial styles 19 speakers: 5 men and 12 women

Material: Controlled speech, neutral sentences and a brief technical text on history of Welsh, recorded at 44kHz, 16 bit, in WAV PCI format using condenser microphone. Reading and recording was done in a quiet place. 20 sentences, tone units per language per speaker.

Labelling and measuring: Span Pitch span was determined as the difference in semitones between the average of the speaker’s peaks and L% tones. If creaky voice was used for final lowering, the measurement was taken immediately prior to the creaky interval.

Labelling and measuring: Level Three measures for pitch level were defined: 1) average of F0 peaks, 2) average of L%, and 3) average of means on each tone unit.

Analysis Wilcoxon Signed Rank Data for males and females processed separately to consider the possible effect of gender (where assumptions for paired t-tests were met, parametric tests were performed, but not reported here for consistency. Parametric tests showed greater effect size).

RESULTS: 14 females Span is wider in Welsh than in English (z=-3.17; p=0.002; r=0.6) The median score increased from M=7.68 for English to M=8.92 for Welsh The average difference is 1.41ST

RESULTS: 14 females Level is higher in Welsh than in English if defined as F0 peaks (z=-3.23; p=0.001; r=0.61) The median score increased from M= for English to M= for Welsh The average difference is 1.4ST

RESULTS: 14 females Level is not significantly different if defined as F0 on L% tones or as mean F0 on tone units.

RESULTS: 5 males Span is 0.6ST wider in Welsh than in English, but the difference is n/s (p=0.225)

RESULTS: 5 males Level is 0.4ST higher in Welsh than in English if defined as F0 peaks, but the difference is n/s, p=0.225

RESULTS: 5 males Level is not significantly different if defined as F0 on L% tones or as mean F0 on tone units.

Summary of results so far: Females Pitch range differs between Welsh and English Difference is in span Difference is in F0max No sign difference in F0means and F0min Males Pitch range does not differ between Welsh and English FEW SPEAKERS?????

Individual Statistics: Females, F0max

Individual Statistics: Females, Span

Individual Statistics: Males, Level

Individual Statistics: Males, Span

Strategies: increasing F0 peaks in Welsh (or decreasing F0 peaks in English); using creaky voice in Welsh for final lowering (or cancelling creaky voice in English); increasing F0 means in Welsh (or decreasing F0 means in English); decreasing F0 minimums in Welsh (or increasing F0 minimums in English).

Are strategies independent? ANOVA: Hypothesis: the more strategies the speaker uses, the smaller the different between F0max in Welsh and English expected. Dependent var: difference in F0max in Welsh and in English Independent var 1: number of strategies (2 levels – 1 and 3 different strategies employed) Independent var 2: speaker (6 levels) Outcome: no sign influence. Trade-off? Not enough data to say for sure.

What causes these differences? 1)Social and culture-rooted. 2)Language system (in Welsh I heard more rising tones while in English there were more falling tones). Peculiarities of speech perception. What are we listening to when we evaluate span and level – overall register or the maximums?

Further research I Difference in pitch range as a social marker II Acquisition of pitch range by sequential and simultaneous bilinguals III Perception of pitch range