Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.



Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Original Paper

How Truncating Are ‘Truncating Languages'? Evidence from Russian and German

Rathcke T.V.

Author affiliations

University of Kent, Canterbury, UK

Related Articles for ""

Phonetica 2016;73:194-228

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.


Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Learn more

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply

Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00


Select

Subscribe

  • Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates


Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: February 16, 2015
Accepted: January 11, 2016
Published online: February 23, 2017
Issue release date: February 2017

Number of Print Pages: 35
Number of Figures: 21
Number of Tables: 10

ISSN: 0031-8388 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0321 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/PHO

Abstract

Russian and German have pr eviously been described as ‘truncating‘, or cutting off target frequencies of the phrase-final pitch trajectories when the time available for voicing is compromised. However, supporting evidence is rare and limited to only a few pitch categories. This paper reports a production study conducted to document pitch adjustments to linguistic materials, in which the amount of voicing available for the realization of a pitch pattern varies from relatively long to extremely short. Productions of nuclear H+L*, H* and L*+H pitch accents followed by a low boundary tone were investigated in the two languages. The results of the study show that speakers of both ‘truncating languages' do not utilize truncation exclusively when accommodating to different segmental environments. On the contrary, they employ several strategies - among them is truncation but also compression and temporal re-alignment - to produce the target pitch categories under increasing time pressure. Given that speakers can systematically apply all three adjustment strategies to produce some pitch patterns (H* L% in German and Russian) while not using truncation in others (H+L* L% particularly in Russian), we question the effectiveness of the typological classification of these two languages as ‘truncating'. Moreover, the phonetic detail of truncation varies considerably, both across and within the two languages, indicating that truncation cannot be easily modeled as a unified phenomenon. The results further suggest that the phrase-final pitch adjustments are sensitive to the phonological composition of the tonal string and the status of a particular tonal event (associated vs. boundary tone), and do not apply to falling vs. rising pitch contours across the board, as previously put forward for German. Implications for the intonational phonology and prosodic typology are addressed in the discussion.

© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel


References

  1. Adank P, Hagoort P, Bekkering H (2010): Imitation improves language comprehension. Psychol Sci 21:1903-1909.
  2. Arvaniti A, Ladd DR, Mennen I (1998): Stability of tonal alignment: the case of Greek prenuclear accents. J Phon 26:3-25.
  3. Arvaniti A, Ladd DR, Mennen I (2000): What is a starred tone? Evidence from Greek; in Broe MB, Pierrehumbert JB (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the Lexicon. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 119-131.
  4. Babel ME (2012): Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. J Phon 40:177-189.
  5. Bannert R, Bredvad A (1975): Temporal Organisation of Swedish Tonal Accent: The Effect of Vowel Duration. Working Papers 10. Phonetics Laboratory, Department of General Linguistics, Lund University, Sweden.
  6. Barnes J, Veilleux N, Brugos A, Shattuck-Hufnagel S (2012): Tonal center of gravity: a global approach to tonal implementation in a level-based intonational phonology. Lab Phonol 3:337-383.
  7. Boersma P, Weenink D (1997): Doing phonetics by computer. http://www.praat.org.
  8. Bondarko LV (1998): Fonetika sovremennogo russkogo jazyka. St.-Petersburg.
  9. Bryzgunova EA (1977): Zvuki i intonacija russkoj reči. Moskva, Russkij jazyk.
  10. Bryzgunova EA (1980): Intonacija. Russkaja grammatika. Moskva, Akademija Nauk SSSR, pp 96-122.
  11. Caspers J, van Heuven VJ (1993): Effects of time pressure on the phonetic realization of the Dutch accent-lending pitch rise and fall. Phonetica 50:161-171.
  12. Crespo-Sendra V, Vanrell MM, Prieto P (2010): Information seeking questions and incredulity questions: Gradient or categorical contrast? Proceedings of Speech Prosody, Chicago, USA.
  13. Dufour S, Nguyen N (2013): How much imitation is there in a shadowing task? Front Psychol 4:1-7.
  14. Eriksson Y, Alstermark M (1972): Fundamental frequency correlates of the grave word accent in Swedish: the effect of vowel duration. Speech Transmission Laboratory. Quartely Progress and Status Report 2-3, KTH, Sweden.
  15. Goldinger SD (1998): Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychol Rev 105:251-279.
  16. Gordon M (2001): A typology of contour tone restrictions. Studies in Language 25:423-462.
  17. Gordon MK (2005): Intonational phonology of Chickasaw; in Jun SA (ed): Prosodic Typology. The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford, University Press, pp 301-331.
  18. Grabe E (1998): Pitch accent realisations in English and German. J Phon 26:129-143.
  19. Grabe E, Post B, Nolan F, Farrar K (2000): Pitch accent realization in four varieties of British English. J Phon 28:161-185.
  20. Granström B, House D (2005): Audiovisual representation of prosody in expressive speech communication. Speech Commun 46:473-484.
  21. Grice M (1995a): Leading tones and downstep in English. Phonology 12:183-233.
  22. Grice M (1995b): The Intonation of Interrogation in Palermo Italian: Implications for Intonational Theory. Tübingen, Niemeyer.
  23. Grice M, Baumann S, Benzmüller R (2005): German intonation in autosemental-metrical phonology; in Jun SA (ed): Prosodic Typology. The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford, University Press, pp 55-83.
  24. Grønnum N (1989): Stress group patterns, sentence accents and sentence intonation in Southern Jutland (Sønderborg and Tønder) - with a view to German. ARIPUK 23:1-85.
  25. Gussenhoven C (1999): Discreteness and gradience in intonational contrasts. Lang Speech 42:283-305.
  26. Gussenhoven C (2004): The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge, University Press.
  27. Hanson HM (2009): Effects of obstruent consonants on fundamental frequency at vowel onset in English. J Acoust Soc Am 125:425-441.
  28. Hanssen J, Peters J, Gussenhoven C (2007): Alignment of the second low target in Dutch falling-rising pitch contours. Proceedings of the 8th Interspeech Conference, Antwerp, pp 2641-2644.
  29. Harrington J (2010): The Phonetic Analysis of Speech Corpora. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers.
  30. Harrington J, Kleber F, Reubold U (2008): Compensation for coarticulation, /u/-fronting, and sound change in standard southern British: an acoustic and perceptual study. J Acoust Soc Am 123:2825-2835.
  31. House D (2004): Pitch and alignment in the perception of tone and intonation: pragmatic signals and biological codes. Proceedings of International Symposium on Tonal Aspects of Languages: Emphasis on Tone Languages, Beijng, pp 93-96.
  32. Igarashi Y (2002): Tak nazyvajemaja nejtralizacija intonacii - fonologičeskoje opisanije russkoj intonacii. Bulletin Jpn Assoc Russ Scholarsh 34:15-21.
  33. Igarashi Y (2005): How Many Falling Intonation Patterns in Russian? Categories of F0 Alignment. Between Stress and Tone. Abstracts of IIAS Conference, Leiden, pp 32-34.
  34. Igarashi Y (2006): Intonation patterns in Russian interrogatives - phonetic analyses and phonological interpretations; in Kawaguchi Y, Fonagy I, Moriguchi T (eds): Usage-Based Linguistic Informaticts 3: Prosody and Syntax. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 175-196.
  35. D'Imperio M (2001): Focus and tonal structure in Neapolitan Italian. Speech Commun 33:339-356.
  36. Jun SA (2005): Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford University Press.
  37. Jun SA (2014): Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford University Press.
  38. Knight RA, Nolan F (2006): The effect of pitch span on intonational plateaux. J Int Phon Assoc 36:21-38.
  39. Kohler KJ (1987): Categorical pitch perception. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Tallinn, pp 331-333.
  40. Kohler KJ (1991): Terminal intonation patterns in single-accent utterances of German: phonetics, phonology, semantics; in Kohler KJ (ed): Studies in German Intonation. AIPUK, vol 25, pp 295-368.
  41. Kohler KJ (1995): Einführung in die Phonetik des Deutschen. Berlin, Erich Schmidt Verlag.
  42. Ladd DR (2004): Segmental anchoring of pitch movements: autosegmental phonology or speech production? in Quené H, van Heuven V (eds): On Speech and Language: Essays for Sieb B. Nooteboom. Utrecht, LOT, pp 123-131.
  43. Ladd DR (1996/2008): Intonational Phonology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  44. Ladd DR, Morton R (1997): The perception of intonational emphasis: continuous or categorical? J Phon 25:313-342.
  45. Liberman M, Pierrehumbert J (1984): Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length; in Aronoff M, Oehrle R (eds): Language Sound Structure. Cambridge, MIT Press, pp 157-233.
  46. Lindblom B (1990): Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H&H theory; in Hardcastle W, Marchal A (eds): Speech Production and Speech Modeling. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp 403-439.
  47. Maeda K, Venditti J (1998): Phonetic investigation of boundary pitch movements in Japanese. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP). Sydney, Australia.
  48. Makarova V (2003): Intonation features in categorization of Russian sentence type; in Kosta P, Blaszczak J (eds): Investigations into Formal Slavic Linguistics IV, pp 83-95.
  49. Makarova V (2007): The effect of pitch peak alignment on sentence type identification in Russian. Lang Speech 50:385-422.
  50. Meltzoff AN, Kuhl PK, Movel-lan J, Sejnowski TJ (2009): Foundations for a new science of learning. Science 325:284-288.
  51. Morev LN (1983): Shanskii Yazyk. Moskva: Izdatelstvo Nauka.
  52. Mooshammer C, Geng C (2008): Acoustic and articulatory manifestations of vowel reduction in German. J Int Phon Assoc 38:117-136.
  53. Niebuhr·(2007): Perzeption und Kognitive Verarbeitung der Sprachmelodie: Theoretische Grundlagen und Empirische Untersuchungen. Berlin, de Gruyter.
  54. Niebuhr·(2012): At the edge of intonation: the interplay of utterance-final f0 movements and voiceless fricative sounds. Phonetica 69:7-27.
  55. Odé C (1989): Russian Intonation: A Percertual Description. Amsterdam, Rodopi.
  56. Odé C (2005): Neutralization or truncation? The perception of two Russian pitch accents on utterance final syllables. Speech Commun 47:71-79.
  57. Odé C (2008): Transcription of Russian intonation ToRI, an interactive research tool and learning module on the internet; in Houtzagers P, Kalsbeek J, Schaeken J (eds): Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics. Amsterdam/New York, Rodopi, pp 431-449.
  58. Ohala J, Ewan W (1973): Speed of pitch change. J Acoust Soc Am 53:345(A).
  59. Ohl CK, Pfitzinger HR (2009): Compression and truncation revisited. Proceedings of the 10th Interspeech Brighton, UK, pp 2451-2454.
  60. Pierrehumbert JB (1980): The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation. PhD-Dissertation am MIT, Massachusetts.
  61. Pierrehumbert JB, Steele SA (1987): How many rise-fall-rise contours? Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Tallin, pp 49.1.1-49.1.4.
  62. Pierrehumbert JB, Steele SA (1989): Categories of tonal alignment in English. Phonetica 46:181-196.
  63. Prieto P (2005): Stability effects in tonal clash contexts in Catalan. J Phon 33:215-242.
  64. Prieto P, van Santen J, Hirschberg J (1995): Tonal alignment patterns in Spanish. J Phon 23:429-451.
  65. Prieto P, Ortega-Llebaría M (2009): Do complex pitch gestures induce syllable lengthening in Catalan and Spanish? in Vigário M, Frota S, Freitas MJ (eds): Phonetics and Phonology: Interactions and Interrelations. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp 51-70.
  66. Prieto P, Torreira F (2007): The segmental anchoring hypothesis revisited: syllable structure and speech rate effects on peak timing in Spanish. J Phon 35:473-500.
  67. Rathcke T (2006a): A perceptual study on Russian questions and statements; in Harrington JM, Mooshammer C, Kleber F (eds): Arbeitsberichte: AIPUK 37, pp 51-62.
  68. Rathcke T (2006b): Relevance of f0 peak shape and alignment for the perception of a functional contrast in Russian. Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Speech Prosody, Dresden, Germany, pp 65-68.
  69. Rathcke T (2013): On the neutralizing status of truncation in intonation: a perception study of boundary tones in German and Russian. J Phon 41:172-185.
  70. Rathcke T, Harrington J (2010): The variability of early accent peaks in standard German; in Fougeron C, Kuhnert B, D'Imperio M (eds): Laboratory Phonology 10. Phonology and Phonetics. De Gruyter, Berlin/New York, pp 533-556.
  71. Schepman A, Lickely R, Ladd DR (2006): Effects of vowel length and ‘right context' on the alignment of Dutch nuclear accents. J Phon 34:1-28.
  72. Silverman K, Pierrehumbert JB (1990): The timing of prenuclear high accents in English. Lab Phon 1:72-106.
  73. Steele SA (1986): Nuclear accent peak location: effects of rate, vowel and number of following syllables. J Acoust Soc Am 80(suppl 1):S51.
  74. Sundberg J (1979): Maximum speed of pitch changes in singers and untrained subjects. J Phon 7:71-79.
  75. Svetozarova ND (1982): Intonatsionnaja Sistiema Russkogo Jazyka. [Intonational System of Russian.] Leningrad, Leningrad University Press.
  76. Uhmann S (1991): Fokusphonologie. Eine Analyse Deutscher Intonationskonturen im Rahmen der Nicht-Linearen Phonologie. Tübingen, Niemeyer.
  77. Watkins L (1984): A Grammar of Kiowa. Lincoln, Nebraska, University of Nebraska Press.
  78. Wenk R (1975): Die intonation; in Gabka K, Wiede E (eds): Einführung in das Studium der Russischen Sprache. Bd. 1: Phonetik und Phonologie. Leipzig, VEB, pp 175-198.
  79. Xu Y (1998): Consistency of tone-syllable alingment across different syllable structures and speaking rates. Phonetica 55:179-203.
  80. Xu Y, Sun X (2002): Maximum speed of pitch change and how it may relate to speech. J Acoust Soc Am 111:1399-1414.
  81. Yip M (1989): Contour tones. Phonology 6:149-174.
  82. Yu A (2003): Contour Tone Induced Lengthening in Cantonese. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, pp 2381-2384.
  83. Yu A (2010): Tonal effects on perceived vowel duration; in Fougeron C, Kühnert B, D'Imperio M, Vallée N (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology 10. Berlin, M. de Gruyter, pp 151-168.
  84. Zhang J (2002): The Effects of Duration and Sonority on Contour Tone Distribution - A Typological Survey and Formal Analysis. Routledge, New York.
  85. Zhang J (2004): The role of contrast-specific and language-specific phonetics in contour tone distribution; in Hayes B, Kirchner R, Steriade D (eds): Phonetically Based Phonology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 157-190

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: February 16, 2015
Accepted: January 11, 2016
Published online: February 23, 2017
Issue release date: February 2017

Number of Print Pages: 35
Number of Figures: 21
Number of Tables: 10

ISSN: 0031-8388 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0321 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/PHO


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.