Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (5)
- German (1)
- Portuguese (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Keywords
- Prosody (7) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (2)
- Peer-review (1)
Publisher
Prosodic constructions used to compete for the speaking turn in conversation have been widely studied (French & Local (1983), Kurtić et al. (2013)). Usually, turn competition arises in overlapping talk between at least two speakers. Coordination between participants in their prosodic design of talk (Szczepek-Reed, 2006) and social action (Gorisch et al. 2012), as well as entrainment in more general terms (Levitan et al. 2011), is well established in the literature. Nevertheless, previous studies on turn competition and overlap do not investigate the prosodic design of turn competitive incomings in reference to the orientation of the speakers to each other. Rather, they assume that prosodic constructions are used for turn competition regardless of the co-participants’ design of the turn. In this paper, we ask whether the prosodic design of turn competitive talk is co-constructed between two participants talking in overlap. More specifically, we investigate whether the prosodic design of one participant’s in overlap talk is developed with respect to the interlocutor’s prosodic features during the same portion of overlapped talk, and whether this prosodic matching can discriminate between the overlaps that are competitive and those that are not. 183 Our analyses are based on two-speaker overlaps drawn from a corpus of multi-party face-to face conversation between four friends recorded in British English (Kurtic et al. 2012). 3407 instances of twospeaker overlaps have been extracted from 4 hours of talk. Two independent conversation analysts performed the interactional categorisation of overlaps into competitive and non-competitive for all these two-speaker overlap instances and achieved a good agreement of alpha=0.807 (Krippendorff 2004) as measured on a subset of 808 overlaps selected for our initial analysis. For the analysis of prosodic features we focus on F0 related features: mean, slope, span and contour, all of which have previously been shown to be used by each overlapping speaker separately for turn competition (Kurtic et al. 2009; Oertel et al. 2012). We investigate the similarity in F0 mean, slope and span by correlating these features across the two participants. For F0 contour, a similarity coefficient is computed using dynamic programming method described in Gorisch et al. (2012). We consider the difference in F0 contour similarity in competitive and non-competitive overlaps as an indication of intonational matching being a turn competitive resource. We conduct these analyses for overlaps that are clearly competitive or noncompetitive as indicated by inter-annotator agreement. In addition, we qualitatively explore those cases that annotators disagree on in order to investigate whether they reveal further important interactional or prosodic features of in-overlap talk. Our preliminary results suggest that conversational participants attend and adapt to the interlocutor during overlap depending on whether they return competition or not. We explain our findings in relation to previous work on turn competition in overlap, discuss the quantitative method employed and also address the possible consequences of our results for the study of prosodic realization of other social actions in conversation.
Contrasting and turn transition: Prosodic projection with the parallel-opposition constructions
(2009)
The parallel-opposition construction has not yet been widely described as an independent construction type. This article reports on its realization in everyday British-English conversation. In particular, it focusses on prosodic projection in the lexically and syntactically unmarked first component of this syntactic pattern, and thus adds to the body of research investigating the organization of turn-taking in the context of bi-clausal constructions with which the first part lacks explicit lexical hints to their continuation. It is shown that the parallel-opposition construction, next to specific semantic–pragmatic, syntactic and lexical features, also exhibits a relatively fixed range of prosodic features in the first conjunct, among these narrow focus, continuing intonation and/or the avoidance of intonation-unit boundary signals. These are used to project continuation of an otherwise complete utterance and, thus, to secure the floor for the expression of contrast. In addition, the detailed analysis of apparently deviant cases, which takes into account the on-line production of syntax, shows that a lack of prosodically projective features in the first component of the parallel-opposition construction can be explained by the strategic, retrospective use of the construction to resolve problems in turn transition.
A trainable prosodic model called SFC (Superposition of Functional Contours), proposed by Holm and Bailly, is here confronted to German intonation. Training material is the publicly available Siemens Synthesis Corpus that provides spoken utterances for high-quality speech synthesis. We describe the labeling framework and first evaluation results that compares the original prosody of test sentences of this corpus with their prosodic rendering by the proposed model and state-of-the-art systems available on-line on the web.
Optimality theory (henceforth OT) models natural language competence in terms of interactions of universal constraints, notably markedness and faithfulness constraints. This article illustrates some of the major advances in the understanding of word-formation phenomena originating from this theory, including the prosodic organization of morphologically complex words, neutralization patterns in derivational affixes, allomorphy, and infixation.
Der vorliegende Aufsatz gibt einen Überblick über das syntaktische, prosodische und semantische Verhalten sowie die textuelle Funktion kausaler Konnektoren im heutigen Deutsch. Im ersten Abschnitt wird Textkohärenz in räumliche, zeitliche und kausale Kohärenz unterteilt. Räumliche und zeitliche Kohärenz werden zu einem erheblichen Teil durch grammatische Sprachmittel kodiert, während kausale Kohärenz vor allem durch lexikalische Mittel ausgedrückt wird: durch Präpositionen, Konjunktionen und Adverbien. Im zweiten Abschnitt werden die wichtigsten kausalen Konnektoren des Gegenwartsdeutschen vorgestellt und in ihren syntaktischen und semantischen Haupteigenschaften beschrieben. Der dritte Abschnitt behandelt das linguistische Konzept der Ursache vor dem Hintergrund allgemeinerer philosophischer Reflexionen über Kausalität. Das Konzept der Verursachung wird zurückgeführt auf die zugrundeliegenden Konzepte der Situation und der Bedingung. Der vierte Abschnitt ist der Unterscheidung zwischen drei Arten kausaler Verknüpfungen gewidmet, die als dispositionelle, epistemische und deontisch-illokutionäre bezeichnet werden. Empirisch erlauben kausale Verknüpfungen häufig mehr als eine dieser Lesarten. Die folgenden Unterabschnitte untersuchen im Detail die syntaktischen, prosodischen und semantischen Bedingungen, durch die epistemische und deontische Lesarten kausaler Verknüpfungen möglich werden. Als wichtigste Faktoren, die die Interpretation beeinflussen, werden herausgestellt: syntaktische, prosodische und informationelle Integration der verknüpften Ausdrücke, Definitheit der Ursache sowie modale Umgebungen.
Syntactic negation and particularly the position of the negative particle nicht are challenging themes not only for learners of German as a foreign language, but also for teachers and researchers of the grammar of German. This paper gives an overview of recent studies related to negation in Modern German. In its main part, it presents results of empirical research on the relationship between syntax and prosody in the field of negation.