On the Boundaries of Phonology and Phonetics
|
|  Yüklə 3.17 Mb.
|
NotesReferencesAusterlitz, R. (1977). The study of Paleosiberian languages. In: D. Armstrong and C. van Schoonveld (eds.). Roman Jakobson: Echoes of His Scholarship. Peter de Ridder Press, Lisse, 13-20. Beckman, J. (1996). Positional Faithfulness. PhD Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Benua, L. (1997a). Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words. PhD dissertation, U.Mass, Amherst. Benua, L. (1997b). Affix classes are defined by faithfulness. In: V. Miglio and B. Moren (eds.), 1-26. Blevins, J. (1993). Gilyak lenition as a phonological rule. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 13: 1-21. Burzio, L. (1996). Surface constraints versus underlying representation. In: J. Durand and B. Laks (eds.),125-144. Burzio, L. (1997). Strength in Numbers. In: V.Miglio and B.Moren (eds.), 27-52. Burzio, L. (2002). Missing players: Phonology and the past-tense debate. Lingua, 112: 157-199. Chomsky, N. and M. Halle (1968). The Sound Patterns of English. Harper & Row, New York. Durand, J. and B. Laks (eds.) (1996). Current Trends in Phonology: Models and Methods. University of Salford Publications, Salford, Manchester. Hattori, T. (1962). Versuch einer Phonologie des Südostgiljakischen (II) - Alternation. Journal of Hokkaido Gakugei University (Sapporo), 13-2: 29-96. Inkelas, S, O. Orgun and C. Zoll (1997). The Implications of Lexical Exceptions for the Nature of Grammar. In: I.Roca (ed.), 393-418. Ito, J. and A. Mester (1997). Correspondence and Compositionality: The Ga-gyo Variation in Japanese Phonology. In: I.Roca (ed.), 419-462. Jakobson, R. (1957). Notes on Gilyak. Roman Jakobson. Selected Writings II. Word and language. Mouton, The Hague and Paris, 72-102. Kaisse, E. (1985). Connected Speech. Academic Press, Orlando. Kenstowicz, M. (1996). Base-Identity and Uniform Exponence: Alternatives to Cyclicity. In: J. Durand and B. Laks (eds.), 365-395. Kenstowicz, M. (1997). Uniform exponence: Exemplification and extension. In: V. Miglio and B. Moren (eds.), 139-155. Kenstowicz, M. and C. Kisserberth. (1979). Generative Phonology: description and theory. Academic Press, New York. Krejnovich, E. (1937). Fonetika nivxskogo (giljackogo) jazyka [Phonetics of the Nivkh (Gilyak) language]. Uchpedgiz, Moskva - Leningrad. Ladefoged, P. and I. Maddieson. (1996). The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Blackwell, Oxford. Miglio, V. and B. Moren (eds.) (1997). University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics, vol.5. Nepor, M. and I. Vogel (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Foris, Dordrecht. Roca, I. (ed.) (1997). Derivations and Constraints in Phonology. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Rushchakov, V. (1981). Akusticheskie xarakteristiki soglasnyx nivxskogo jazyka (avtoreferat). Ph.D.dissertation, Akademija Nauk CCCP, Leningradskoe otdelenie instituta jazykoznanija. Savel’eva,V. and C.Taksami. (1970). Nivxsko-russkij slovar. [Nivkh-Russian dictionary] Sovetskaja Enciklopedija, Moskva. Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3: 371-405. Shiraishi, H. (2000). Nivkh consonant alternation does not involve hardening. Journal of Chiba University Eurasian Society. No.3. 89-119 (Also available at www.let.rug.nl/˜toshi/list_of_publication.htm). Abridged version has appeared in the Proceedings of the 120th meeting of the Japanese Society of Linguists, 42-47. Shternberg, L. (1908). Materialy po izucheniju gilijackogo jazyka i fol’klora. In: Obrachy narodnoj slovesnosti. Vol. 1, Part I. Imper. Akademii Nauk, St.Petersburg. Steriade, D. (2000). Paradigm Uniformity and the Phonetics-Phonology boundary. In: M. Broe and J. Pierrehumbert (eds.). Papers in Laboratory Phonology 5. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 313-334 Trubetzkoj, N. (1939). Grundzuge der Phonologie. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, Prague. The Influence of Speech Rate on Rhythm Patterns Maartje Schreuder and Dicky Gilbers 1.Introduction44The topic of this paper is how rhythmic variability in speech can be accounted for both phonologically and phonetically. The question is whether a higher speech rate leads to adjustment of the phonological structure, or just to 'phonetic compression', i.e. shortening and merging of vowels and consonants, with preservation of the phonological structure. We claim that the melodic content of a phonological domain is indeed adjusted optionally when the speech rate increases. In other words, every speech rate has its own preferred register, in terms of Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky, 1993) its own ranking of constraints. We will investigate prosodic variability as part of our main research project, which involves a comparison of the analyses of music and language. Our ultimate aim is to provide evidence for the assumption that every temporal behavior is structured similarly (cf. Liberman, 1975). Gilbers and Schreuder (to appear) show that Optimality Theory owes a lot to the constraint-based music theory of Lerdahl and Jackendoff (1983). Based on the great similarities between language and music we claim that musical knowledge can help in solving linguistic issues. In this paper, we will show that clashes are avoided in allegro tempo. In both language and music distances between beats are enlarged, i.e. there appears to be more melodic content between beats. To illustrate this, we ran a pilot experiment in which we elicited fast speech. As expected, speech rate plays a role in rhythmic variability. The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 the data of the experiment is introduced. Section 3 is addressed to the phonological framework of Optimality Theory and the different rankings of andante and allegro speech. The method of the experiment is discussed in section 4 and the auditive and acoustic analyses plus the results follow in section 5. The perspectives of our analysis will be discussed in the final section. |