1. EP and BP Rhythm: Acoustic and Perceptual Evidence Sónia Frota Universidade de Lisboa Marina Vigário, Fernando Martins

2. EP and BP in the rhythm typology I. Correlates of rhythm in the speech signal Frota & Vigário 2001 II. Language discrimination experiments Frota, Vigário & Martins in progress –Goals: Better understanding of the rhythmic  EP / BP Clarify the status of ‘mixed’ languages

3. Background Traditional view  isochrony ( , ´   ,  ) New approach (Dasher & Bolinger, Daues 1983, 1987, Nespor 1990) –phonological & phonetic properties syllable structurexy vowel reductionxy rhythmic  s intonation/stressxy –acoustic correlates reflect p-properties (Ramus et al. 1999) syllable structure variety/complexity-  C %V + vowel reduction-  V <  V + –Rhythmic continuum or rhythm classes?  perception

4. P-properties: predictions EP stress-timed –reduced unstressed vowel system –phonetic deletion [ ,u ] long C clusters –strong contrast ´  /  –intonation lingers on stress More stress-timed –  C >BP, %V BP BP syll.timed/mixed –less vowel reduction (no centralisation [ ,  ]) –vowel epenthesis syllable simplication –weaker contrast ´  /  –intonation // stress More syllable-timed –  C EP,  V<EP

5. I. Correlates of rhythm Frota & Vigário 2001 Materials x

6. Domain of rhythm Intonational phrase (I) –sentence = I-phrase Why? –Lapses and clashes –Weight effects (Pepperkamp 1992, Nespor 1999, G&N 1999, F&V 1999) Phrasing variation due to speech rate (slower rate > more Is within a string) Sentence duration –EP < BP (*2corpora) –Effect on  C and  V (Grabe & Low 2000)

7. Durational difference Effect on variability –Intervalduration x100 sentence duration –standard deviation  %C and  %V  EP/BP

8. Results: EP  BP Distinguishing role is played by %V and  %C

9. Acoustic results and our predictions %V: EP<BP   %C: EP>BP   %V: EP>BPX –vowel reduction 1: shorter Vs >  V 2.: no V   V, < %V –intrinsic V duration more extreme  s in BP –phonological phrase lengthening in BP Variation in  %V within EP Stress-timed EP/Syl.-timed BP

10. Results: EP and BP in the rhythmic chart EP: stressed (  C) and syllable-timed (%V) mixed BP: syllable (  C) and mora-timed (%V) lang. ?

11. Are mixed languages intermediate languages? If so, a rhythmic continuum (Dauer 1987, Nespor 1990, Auer 1991) If not, rhythmic classes –EP/BP results (more languages?) Correlation %V,  C –One of them is enough Conflicting classifications –(At least) Both are needed

12. P-properties revisited Syllable types: syllable-timed languages –p-processes: BP coda loss vowel epenthesis > Generalisation of CV –p-processes: EP effacement of Vs > C clusters Signal cues –/ C(C)V/ –p-processes

13. II. Language discrimination Frota, Vigário & Martins EP and BP allow us to test the perceptual weighting of %V and  C –EP %V plays the major role  EP  stress-timed L  C plays the major role  EP  syllable-timed L Both are equally decisive  EP  stress-timed L EP  syllable-timed L 2 experiments: EP/BP, Targeting 2 Languages –Test the relevance of intonation

14. Methods EP/BP –source sentences: Rm 15-19 syllables each representative –low-pass filtering 400Hz –2 conditions: with F0 without F0 (flat= mean F0 ) –16 pairs: 6xY=Z;10xY  Z –Y, Z: different speakers –29 subjects  naive Targeting 2 Languages –Dutch, Spanish: RMN –EP, BP: Rm 15 or 17 syllables –low-pass filtering 400Hz –2 conditions Praat –20 pairs: 4xY=Z (Du/Du; Sp/Sp); 4xDu/Sp; 4xPE/Du; 4xBP/Du; 4xEP/BP –30 subjects  naive

15. Methods The story told – Tigre (afro-asian) & Hua (indo-pacific) –Task: Y,Z are from the same or from different Ls Training –4 sentences of Tigre (EP, Du) –4 sentences of Hua (BP, Sp) –2 Y=Z pairs, 2 Y  Z pairs –both types, with feedback (5pairs; 8 pairs)

16. EP/BP: results

17. EP and BP are discriminated F0 is relevant –task feasable –better results EP, BP and other languages? Du, SP

18. Targeting 2 Languages Is EP like Du (Tigre) or Sp (Hua) or none? Is BP like Du or Sp or none? –EP %V  EP  Du, EP = Sp  C  EP = Du, EP  Sp Both  problem (inconsistent results) –BP BP  Du, SP?

19. Targeting 2 Languages: Results

20. Targeting 2 Languages Is EP like Du (Tigre) or Sp (Hua) or none? Is BP like Du or Sp or none? –EPis Hua %V  EP  Du, EP = Sp is not Tigre  C  EP = Du, EP  Sp Both  problem (inconsistent results) –BPis Hua BP  Du, SP?

21. F0 effect

22. Conclusion Acoustic evidence –EP  BP (%V,  C) –EP has mixed rhythm stress (  C)&syll.(%V) –BP has mixed rhythm syll.(  C)&mora (%V) –No problem to the rhythm class hypothesis –Test the perceptual weighting of %V and  C Perceptual evidence –EP  BP (62.9%) –F0 is relevant (46.7%) –EP, BP, Stress-timed L Syllable-timed L EP  Du (64.3%) –%V takes the lead –EP –BP

23. EP and BP Rhythm: Acoustic and Perceptual Evidence Sónia Frota Universidade de Lisboa Marina Vigário, Fernando Martins Thanks to F.Ramus, L.Wetzels, T.Rietveld, G.Elordieta