Location of Repository

Single prosodic phrase sentences

By Caroline Féry and Heiner Drenhaus

Abstract

A series of production and perception experiments investigating the prosody and well-formedness of special sentences, called Wide Focus Partial Fronting (WFPF), which consist of only one prosodic phrase and a unique initial accented argument, are reported on here. The results help us to decide between different models of German prosody. The absence of pitch height difference on the accent of the sentence speaks in favor of a relative model of prosody, in which accents are scaled relative to each other, and against models in which pitch accents are scaled in an absolute way. The results also speak for a model in which syntax, but not information structure, influences the prosodic phrasing. Finally, perception experiments show that the prosodic structure of sentences with a marked word order needs to be presented for grammaticality judgments. Presentation of written material only is not enough, and falsifies the results

Topics: ddc:400
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de:10066

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1992). A Theory of Focus Interpretation. doi
  2. (1976). Aspects of English sentence stress. doi
  3. (1985). Associations with focus.
  4. (1996). Bemerkungen zur I-Topikalisierung.
  5. (2002). Complex Predicates: Verbal Complexes, Resultative Constructions, and Particle Verbs doi
  6. (2006). Contrastive focus, givenness and phrase stress. Unpublished manuscript.
  7. (2003). Downtrends and Post-FOCUS Intonation in Tokyo Japanese
  8. (1994). Focus and operator scope
  9. (2006). Focus projection and prosodic prominence in nested foci. doi
  10. (1995). Focus, accent, and argument structure: Effects on language comprehension,
  11. (1984). Fokus, Topik, syntaktische Struktur und semantische Interpretation.
  12. (1918). Gesammelte Schriften. Vol II. doi
  13. (2005). Gradient perception of intonation. doi
  14. (2005). Interpreting Second Occurrence Focus. doi
  15. (1984). Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length.
  16. (2008). Ishihara (to appear) How Focus and Givenness Shapes Prosody. doi
  17. (2006). Left peripheral focus: Mismatches between syntax and information structure. doi
  18. (2001). Misleading dialogues: Human’s brain reaction to prosodic information. In: Cave,
  19. (2007). Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24. Special Issue on Prosodic Phrasing and Tunes. doi
  20. (1995). Phonological Phrases: Their Relation to Syntax, Focus and Prominence. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
  21. (2006). Pitch and duration scaling for contrastive focus: A phrase stress analysis.
  22. (2006). Prosodic influence on syntactic judgments. In: Gradience doi
  23. (2002). Psycholinguistics cannot escape prosody. In: Speech Prosody
  24. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. doi
  25. (1992). Sentence accents and argument structure. In: Thematic structure: Its role doi
  26. (1987). The ‘thetic’-‘categorical’ judgement revisited. doi
  27. (1984). The categorical and the thetic judgement reconsidered.
  28. (1995). The Minimalist Program. doi
  29. (2004). The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge: doi
  30. (2001). What do definites do that indefinites definitely don’t?
  31. (2007). Wide Focus Object Fronting 41 Truckenbrodt, H.
  32. (1977). Zur Abfolge nominaler Satzglieder im Deutschen.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.