Phonetica was published by Karger Publishers up to and including 2020. If you or your institution subscribed to Phonetica during that period, you might still have access to the full text of this article on the Karger platform if you cannot access it here.
Abstract
In this study, local and global prosodic cues for information structure are examined in the elicited production of six Bulgarian sentences. The sentences were produced in response to different questions, devised to prompt different focus realizations (broad focus and non-contrastive and contrastive narrow focus). Results show that speakers consistently differentiate broad and narrow focus by means of both local and global acoustic cues, by producing different pitch accent types on the nuclear syllable and reducing the ‘phonetic strength' of the default pre-nuclear accent in the narrow focus condition. Thus, the difference between the acoustic properties of the nuclear and the pre-nuclear accented syllables is smaller in the broad focus condition and greater in the narrow focus condition. Contrastive and non-contrastive narrow-focus accents are differentiated by local cues, i.e., by longer duration when the focus is early in the sentence and by global cues, i.e., by enhancing the tonal contrast between the nuclear prominence of CW2 and the pre-nuclear prominence of CW1 when the focus is late in the sentence.
verified
References
1 Alte r K, Mleinek I, Richter N (2001): Prosodic phrasing and accentuation in Russian; in Zybatow G, Junghanns U, Mehlhorn G, Szucsich L (eds): Current Issues in Formal Slavic Linguistics (= Linguistik International; 5). Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang, pp 317-328.Search in Google Scholar
2 Andreeva B, Avgustinova T, Barry WJ (2001): Link-associated and focus-associated accent patterns in Bulgarian; in Zybatow G, Junghanns U, Mehlhorn G, Szucsich L (eds): Current Issues in Formal Slavic Linguistics (= Linguistik International; 5). Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang, pp 353-364.Search in Google Scholar
3 Andreeva B (2007): Zur Phonetik und Phonologie der Intonation der Sofioter-Varietät des Bulgarischen, PHONUS 12, Institute of Phonetics, University of the Saarland, Saarbrücken, PhD theses.Search in Google Scholar
4 Andreeva B, Koreman J (2008): The status of vowel devoicing in Bulgarian: phonetic or phonological; in Zybatow G, Junghanns U, Mehlhorn G, Szucsich L (eds): Formal Description of Slavic Languages: The Fifth Conference. Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang, pp 81-91.Search in Google Scholar
5 Andreeva B, Barry W, Koreman J (2014): A Cross-Language Corpus for Studying the Phonetics and Phonology of Prominence. Reykjavik, The 9th Edition of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2014), pp 26-31.Search in Google Scholar
6 Arvaniti A, Garding G (2007): Dialectal variation in the rising accents of American English; in Cole J, Hualde JI (eds): Papers in Laboratory Phonology 9. Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 547-576.Search in Google Scholar
7 Avgustinova T (1997): Word Order and Clitics in Bulgarian. Saarbrücken Dissertations in Computational Linguistics and Language Technology. Vol 5.Search in Google Scholar
8 Avgustinova T, Andreeva B (1999): Thematic intonation patterns in Bulgarian Clitic Replication. Proceedings of the14th ICPhS, San Francisco, pp 1501-1504.Search in Google Scholar
9 Barry W, Andreeva B, Russo M, Dimitrova S, Kostadinova T (2003): Do rhythm measures tell us anything about language type; in Recasens D, Solé MJ, Romero J (eds): Proceedings of the 15th ICPhS, Barcelona, pp 2693-2696.Search in Google Scholar
10 Bartels C, Kingston J (1994): Salient pitch cues in the perception of contrastive focus; in Boach P, van der Sandt R (eds): Focus and Natural Language Processing. Proceedings of J Sem Conference on Focus. IBM Working Papers. TR-80, pp 94-106.Search in Google Scholar
11 Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015): Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1-48.10.18637/jss.v067.i01Search in Google Scholar
12 Baumann S, Grice M, Steindamm S (2006): Prosodic marking of focus domains - categorical or gradient? Proceedings of Speech Prosody, Dresden, Germany, pp 301-304.Search in Google Scholar
13 Baumann S, Becker J, Grice M, Mücke D (2007): Tonal and articulatory marking of Focus in German; in Tourvain J, Barry WJ (eds): Proceedings of the 15Ith ICPhS, Pirrot GmbH, Dudweiler, pp 1029-1032.Search in Google Scholar
14 Baumann S, Röhr CT, Grice M (2015): Prosodische (De-)kodierung des informationsstatus im deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 34:1-42.10.1515/zfs-2015-0001Search in Google Scholar
15 Beckman ME (1986): Stress and Non-Stress Accent. Netherlands Phonetic Archives, Series No. 7. Foris.10.1515/9783110874020Search in Google Scholar
16 Bertinetto PM (1981): Strutture prosodiche dell'italiano. Firenze, Accademia della Crusca.Search in Google Scholar
17 Birch S, Clifton C Jr (1995): Focus, accent, and argument structure: effects on language comprehension. Lang Speech 38:365-391.10.1177/002383099503800403Search in Google Scholar
18 Bojadžiev T, Kutsarov I, Penčev J (1999): Săvremenen bălgarski ezik. IK Petăr Beron, Sofija.Search in Google Scholar
19 Bolinger D (1961): Contrastive accent and contrastive stress. Language 37:83-96.10.2307/411252Search in Google Scholar
20 Braun B (2005): Production and perception of thematic contrast in German. Oxford, Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
21 Breen M, Fedorenko E, Wagner M, Gibson E (2010): Acoustic correlates of information structure. Lang Cogn Process 25:1044-1098.10.1080/01690965.2010.504378Search in Google Scholar
22 Braun B (2015): What causes the activation of contrastive alternatives, the size of focus domain or pitch accent type? Proceedings of the 18th ICPhS. Glasgow, UK.Search in Google Scholar
23 Bruce G (1977): Swedish word accents in sentence perspective. CWK Gleerup, Lund.Search in Google Scholar
24 Büring D (2007): Intonation, semantics and information structure; in Ramchand G, Reiss C (eds): The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford, Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199247455.013.0015Search in Google Scholar
25 Calhoun S (2006): Information Structure and the Prosodic Structure of English: A Probabilistic Relationship. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Search in Google Scholar
26 Calhoun S (2010): How does informativeness affect prosodic prominence? Lang Cogn Process 25:1099-1140.10.1080/01690965.2010.491682Search in Google Scholar
27 Chafe W (1976): Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and points of view; in Li CN (ed): Subject and Topic. Academic Press, pp 27-55.Search in Google Scholar
28 Cho T (2005): Prosodic strengthening and featural enhancement: evidence from acoustic and articulatory realizations of /ɑ, i/ in English. J Acoust Soc Am 117:3867-3878.10.1121/1.1861893Search in Google Scholar
29 Cooper WE, Eady SJ, Mueller PR (1985): Acoustical aspects of contrastive stress in question-answer contexts. J Acoust Soc Am 77:2142-2156.10.1121/1.392372Search in Google Scholar
30 Cruttenden A (2006): The de-accenting of given information: a cognitive Universal; in Bernini G, Schwartz ML (eds): Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Language of Europe. Mouton de Gruyter, The Hague, pp 311-355.Search in Google Scholar
31 Cutler A (1977): The Context-Independence of ‘Intonational Meaning'. Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 13), pp 104-115.Search in Google Scholar
32 Dauer R (1987): Phonetic and phonological components of language rhythm. Proceedings of the 11th ICPhS. Tallinn, Estonian Academy of Sciences, vol 5, pp 447-450.Search in Google Scholar
33 Dimitrova S (1998): Bulgarian speech rhythm: stress-timed or syllable-timed? J Int Phonet Assoc 27:27-33.10.1017/S0025100300005399Search in Google Scholar
34 D'Imperio M (1997): Narrow focus and focal accent in the Neapolitan variety of Italian; in Botinis A, Kouroupetroglou G, Carayiannis G (eds): Intonation: Theory, Models and Applications. Proceedings of an ESCA Workshop, Athens, Greece, pp 87-90.Search in Google Scholar
35 Dyer D (1992): Word Order in the Bulgarian Simple Sentence: A Study in Grammar, Semantics and Pragmatics. Amsterdam, Rodopi.Search in Google Scholar
36 Eady SJ, Cooper WE (1986): Speech intonation and focus location in matched statements and questions. J Acoust Soc Am 80:402-415.10.1121/1.394091Search in Google Scholar
37 Féry C, Krifka M (2008): Information structure - notional distinctions, ways of expression; in Sterkenburg PV (ed): Unity and Diversity of Languages. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp 123-136.Search in Google Scholar
38 Féry C, Kügler F (2008): Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. J Phon 36:680-703.10.1016/j.wocn.2008.05.001Search in Google Scholar
39 Frota S (2000): Prosody and Focus in European Portuguese. Phonological Phrasing and Intonation. New York, Garland Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
40 Fry DB (1955): Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress. J Acoust Soc Am 27:765-768.10.1121/1.1908022Search in Google Scholar
41 Georgieva E (1974): Slovored na prostoto izrečenie v bălgraskija knižoven ezik. Sofia, BAN.Search in Google Scholar
42 Grice M (1995): The intonation of Interrogation in Palermo Italian; implications for intonation theory. Tübingen, Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110932454Search in Google Scholar
43 Grice M, Baumann S, Jagdfeld N (2009): Tonal association and derived nuclear accents: the case of downstepping contours in German. Lingua 119:881-905.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.11.013Search in Google Scholar
44 Gussenhoven C (1983): Testing the reality of focus domains. Lang Speech 26:61-80.10.1177/002383098302600104Search in Google Scholar
45 Halliday M (1967): Intonation and grammar in British English. The Hague, Mouton.10.1515/9783111357447Search in Google Scholar
46 Hamlaoui F, Żygis M, Engelmann J, Wagner M (2015): Acoustic correlates of focus marking in Polish. Proceedings of the 18th ICPhS.Search in Google Scholar
47 Hanssen J, Peters J, Gussenhoven C (2008): Prosodic effects of focus in Dutch declaratives. Proc Speech Prosody 2008:609-612.Search in Google Scholar
48 Hualde JI (2002): Intonation in romance: introduction to the special issue. Probus 14:1-7.10.1515/prbs.2002.004Search in Google Scholar
49 Ito K, Speer SR, Beckman ME (2004): Informational status and pitch accent distribution in spontaneous dialogues in English. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Nara, Japan, pp 279-282.Search in Google Scholar
50 Ivančhev S (1957/1978): Nabljudenija vărxu upotrebata na chlena v bălgarskija ezik; in Pašov P (ed): Pomagalo po Bălgarska Morfologija. Imena. Sofia, Nauka i Izkustvo, pp 186-211.Search in Google Scholar
51 Jackendoff R (1972): Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
52 Katz J, Selkirk E (2011): Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: evidence from phonetic prominence in English. Language 87:771-816.10.1353/lan.2011.0076Search in Google Scholar
53 Kochanski G, Grabe E, Coleman J, Rosner B (2005): Loudness predicts prominence: fundamental frequency lends little. J Acoust Soc Am 118:1038-1054.10.1121/1.1923349Search in Google Scholar
54 Koreman J, Andreeva B, Barry W (2008): Accentuation cues in French and German; in Barbosa PA, Madureira S, Reis C (eds): Proceedings of the 4th International Conferences on Speech Prosody. Campinas, Editora RG/CNPq, pp 613-616.Search in Google Scholar
55 Koreman J, Andreeva B, Barry WJ, van Dommelen W, Sikveland RO (2009): Cross-language differences in the production of phrasal prominence in Norwegian and German; in Vainio M, Aulanko R, Aaltonen·(eds): Nordic Prosody. Proceedings of the Xth Conference, Helsinki 2008. Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang, pp 139-150.Search in Google Scholar
56 Krahmer E, Swerts M (2001): On the alleged existence of contrastive accents. Speech Commun 34:391-405.10.1016/S0167-6393(00)00058-3Search in Google Scholar
57 Kratzer A (2004): Interpreting focus: presupposed or expressive meanings? Theoretical Linguistics (30(1), special issue on Interpreting Focus, pp 123-136.10.1515/thli.2004.002Search in Google Scholar
58 Kügler F (2008): The role of duration as a phonetic correlate of focus; in Barbosa PA, Madureira S, Reis C (eds): Proceedings of the Speech Prosody 2008 Conference. Campinas, Editora RG/CNPq, pp 591-594.Search in Google Scholar
59 Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2014): lmertest: tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package): R package version 2.0-25.Search in Google Scholar
60 Ladd RD (2008): Intonational Phonology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808814Search in Google Scholar
61 Leafgren J (2002): Degrees of Explicitness: Information Structure and the Packaging of Bulgarian Subjects and Objects. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 102. Amsterdam, John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.102Search in Google Scholar
62 Lieberman P (1960): Some acoustic correlates of word stress in American English. J Acoust Soc Am 32:451-454.10.1121/1.1908095Search in Google Scholar
63 Manolescu A, Olson D, Ortega-Llebaria M (2009): Cues to contrastive focus in Romanian; in Vigário M, Frota S, Freitas MJ (eds): Interactions in Phonetics and Phonology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.306.04manSearch in Google Scholar
64 Mathesius V (1907): Studie k dějinám anglického slovosledu. Věstník České Akademie 16:261-274, 17:195-214, 299-311.Search in Google Scholar
65 Mathesius V (1939):·tak zvaném aktuálním členění větném. Slovo Slovesnost 5:171-174.Search in Google Scholar
66 Mathesius V (1947): Podstata aposice a její druhy; in Mathesius V (ed): Čeština a Obecný Jazykozpyt. Praha, pp 302-318.Search in Google Scholar
67 Mehlhorn G (2002): Kontrastierte Konstituenten im Russischen. Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Informationsstruktur. Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
68 Meyer R, Mleinek I (2008): How prosody signals force and focus a study of rise-fall accents in Russian yes-no questions; in Zybatow G, Junghanns U, Mehlhorn G, Szucsich L (eds): Proceedings of the Conference FDSL-5, Leipzig 2003. Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
69 Miševa A (1991): Intonacionna Sistema na Bălgarskija Ezik. Sofija, Bălgarska Akademija na Naukite.Search in Google Scholar
70 Miševa A, Nikov M (1998): Intonation in Bulgarian; in Hirst D, Di Cristo A (eds): Intonation Systems: A Survey of 20 Languages. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 275-287.Search in Google Scholar
71 Molnár V (2002): Contrast - from a contrastive perspective; in Hasselgård H, et al (eds): Information Structure in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Amsterdam/New York, Rodopi, pp 147-161.Search in Google Scholar
72 Nikolaeva TM (1977): Frazovaja intonacija slavjanskix jazykov. Moscow, Nauka.Search in Google Scholar
73 Paul H (1937): Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. [Reprint of ed 5. Niemeyer, Halle.].Search in Google Scholar
74 Penčev J (1980): Osnovni intonacionni konturi v bălgarskoto izrečenie. Bălgarska Akademija na Naukite, Sofija.Search in Google Scholar
75 R Core Team (2012): R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org/.Search in Google Scholar
76 Rochemont MS (1986): Focus in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.10.1075/sigla.4Search in Google Scholar
77 Rooth M (1992): A theory of focus interpretation. Nat Lang Seman 1:75-116.10.1007/BF02342617Search in Google Scholar
78 Rudin C (1985): Aspects of Bulgarian syntax: complementizers and wh-constructions. Columbus, Slavica Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
79 Rump HH, Collier R (1996): Focus conditions and the prominence of pitch accented syllables. Lang Speech 39:1-17.10.1177/002383099603900101Search in Google Scholar
80 Selkirk E (2002): Contrastive focus vs. presentational focus: prosodic evidence from right node raising in English; in Bel B, Isabelle M (eds): Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Speech Prosody. France, Aixen-Provence, pp 643-646.Search in Google Scholar
81 Sityaev D, House J (2003): Phonetic and phonological correlates of broad, narrow and contrastive focus in English. Proceedings of the 15th ICPhS, pp 1819-1822.Search in Google Scholar
82 Szober S (1933): Edin osnoven tip nareždane dumite v bălgarskoto izrečenie; Reprinted in Popov K (1979): Pomagalo na bălgarski sintaksis. Sofia, Nauka i Izkustvo, pp 275-285.Search in Google Scholar
83 Sluijter AM, van Heuven VJ (1996): Spectral balance as an acoustic correlate of linguistic stress. J Acoust Soc Am 100(4 pt 1):2471-2485.Search in Google Scholar
84 Smiljanić R (2004): Lexical, Pragmatic, and Positional Effects on Prosody in Two Dialects of Croatian and Serbian: An Acoustic Study. Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics. New York, Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
85 Stojkov St (1966): Uvod văv Fonetikata na Bălgarskija Ezik. Sofija, Nauka i Izkustvo.Search in Google Scholar
86 ‘t Hart J, Collier R, Cohen A (1990): A Perceptual Study of Intonation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511627743Search in Google Scholar
87 Tilkov D (1981): Intonacijata v Bălgarskija Ezik. Sofija, Narodna Prosveta.Search in Google Scholar
88 Tilkov D, Bojadžiev T (1990): Bălgarska Fonetika, ed 3. Sofija, Nauka i Izkustvo.Search in Google Scholar
89 Trávniček F (1962):·tak zvanem aktualnim cleneni vetnem. Slovo Slovesnost 22:163-171.Search in Google Scholar
90 Turk AE, Sawusch JR (1996): The processing of duration and intensity cues to prominence. J Acoust Soc Am 99:3782-3790.10.1121/1.414995Search in Google Scholar
91 Vainio M, Järvikivi J (2007): Focus in production: tonal shape, intensity and word order. J Acoust Soc Am 121:EL55-EL61.10.1121/1.2424264Search in Google Scholar
92 Vallduví E, Vilkuna M (1998): On rheme and contrast; in Culicover PW, McNally L (eds): The limits of Syntax (Syntax & Semantics 29). San Diego, Academic Press, pp 79-108.Search in Google Scholar
93 Welby P (2003): Effects of pitch accent position, type, and status on focus projection. Lang Speech 46(pt 1):53-81.10.1177/00238309030460010401Search in Google Scholar
94 Xu Y, Xu CX (2005): Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation. J Phon 33:159-197.10.1016/j.wocn.2004.11.001Search in Google Scholar
95 Zybatow G, Mehlhorn G (2000): Experimental evidence for focus structure in Russian; in King TH, Sekerina IA (eds): Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Philadelphia Meeting 1999. Ann Arbor, pp 414-434.Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
