Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
loom lom loof lof
Rat
e o
f F
0 ch
ang
e (s
t/se
c)
SD Rise
RO Rise
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
loom lom loof lof
Rat
e o
f F
0 ch
ang
e (s
t/se
c)
SD Fall
RO Fall
ZB Fall (F)
Standard Dutch investigation▪ Hanssen, Peters, Gussenhoven 2007: Adjustment strategies in IP-final nuclear contours (Fall, Rise, and Fall-Rise) with decreasing space for realization.
Standard Dutch results:
Falls & Rises: compression and truncation both applyFall-Rises: pitch range reduction
Correlate of truncation / compression:
Rate of F0 change =
Judith Hanssen, Carlos Gussenhoven, Jörg PetersRadboud University Nijmegen
TIE3 Conference on tone and intonationLisbon 15-17 sept 2008
Compression, truncation & other responses to time pressure
in varieties of Dutch
INTRODUCTION
short short
long word
'Compression'
long word
'Truncation'Hz
Earlier investigations
• Erikson & Alstermark 1972; Bannert & Bredvad 1975 (Swedish); Grønnum 1989 (Danish)
• Grabe 1998a,b; Grabe et al. 2000: Pitch accent realization in phrase-final position in German and English / four varieties of English
German / English results:
Cross-linguistic, cross-dialectal and cross-varietal variation
F0 excursionF0 duration
EXPERIMENT – Method
3 Varieties
• Standard Dutch (16 speakers aged 18-30)• Rotterdam city dialect (19 speakers aged 16-31)• Zuid-Beveland dialect (18 speakers aged 16-33)
Test sentences for Lom(second part of dialogue):
Declarative Ze gingen met meester Lom.
They went with Mister Lom.
Interrogative Liep-ie naast mevrouw de Lom?
Did he walk next to Mrs. de Lom?
‘Toch’-
question
Hij heet toch Pepijn de Lom?
But he’s called Pepijn de Lom, right?
What alignment strategies do we find in Falls, Rises, and Fall-Rises in
Standard Dutch, Rotterdam, and Zuid-Beveland?
RESULTS (1) – Truncation / Compression
Regional variation in the Netherlands?
4 Test words
• LOF• LOOF• LOM• LOOM
3 Sentence types
• Declarative, expected contour: FALL – H*L L%)
• Interrogative, expected contour: RISE – L*H H%)
• ‘Toch’-question, expected contour: FALL-RISE – H*L H%)
Short V; Nonsonorant C - //Long V; Nonsonorant C - //Short V; Sonorant C - //Long V; Sonorant C - //
Duration of Sonorant Rime
LOF < LOOF < LOM < LOOM
Fall < Rise < Fall-Rise
0
100
200
300
SD RO ZB
Du
rati
on
of
son
ora
nt
rim
e (m
s.))
) lof loof lom loom
Q:
RESULTS (2) – Peak retraction
RESULTS (3) – “Rise-Rise” vs. “Fall-Rise”
Standard Dutch and RotterdamRate of F0 change increases as words become shorter: indication of COMPRESSION
Details show that shorter words show smaller F0 excursion: TRUNCATION in addition to compression
Zuid-BevelandRate of F0 change is more stable across all words: indication of TRUNCATION
YES: Cross-dialectal variation
Mean rate of F0 change
RISES
Standard Dutch speakers RETRACT PEAKS as words become shorter.
Visible in both Falls and Fall-Rises.
Averaged contours of Falls
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Averaged contours of Fall-RisesZuid-Beveland Fall-Rise is different from SD and RO.
First peak H1 and second low L2 are strongly compressed or even flattened out.
Standard Dutch and Rotterdam behave the same: final movement (L2-H2) truncated and L2 undershot (or: pitch range reduction).
STANDARD DUTCH ROTTERDAM ZUID-BEVELAND
F0 change in semitones
NB. Zuid-Beveland speakers mostly produce Falls for Interrogatives.
-12
-8
-4
0
0 50 100 150 200
ms.
F0 c
hang
e (s
t)loom
lom
loof
lof
-12
-8
-4
0
0 50 100 150 200
ms.
F0
chan
ge
(st)
-12
-8
-4
0
0 50 100 150 200
ms.
F0
chan
ge
(st)
0
4
8
12
16
0 100 200 300
ms.
F0
chan
ge
(st)
loom
lom
loof
lof
0
4
8
12
16
0 100 200 300
ms.
F0
chan
ge
(st)
FALLS
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
STANDARD DUTCH ROTTERDAM ZUID-BEVELAND
STANDARD DUTCH ROTTERDAM ZUID-BEVELAND
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
“Fall-Rise” “Fall-Rise” “Rise-Rise”
LOF LOOF
LOOMLOM
