Literature DB >> 33765786

Prosodic focus marking in clefts and syntactically unmarked equivalents: Prosody-syntax trade-off or additive effects?

Anja Arnhold1.   

Abstract

Two experiments quantitatively investigated the interaction of prosody and syntax in marking focus in English. A production study with 28 participants (analyzing 919 utterances) found that the acoustic marking of subject focus vs broad focus, induced through a preceding context question, was generally the same in clefts as in sentences with unmarked syntax. Thus, results suggested that prosody is independent from syntax rather than showing a trade-off (weaker prosodic marking for clefts). Focus was marked with f0 range, f0 maxima, f0 minima, duration, and intensity. Maxima of focused subjects were not significantly higher, but they were earlier than in broad focus. In a perception experiment, 230 participants rated the suitability of 24 auditorily presented stimuli as answers to preceding context questions inducing subject focus or broad focus. Clefts and sentences prosodically marking the subject as focused were rated higher in subject focus than in broad focus contexts. Syntax and prosody did not interact, again suggesting the absence of a trade-off. Thus, both studies suggest an additive use of syntax and prosody: Prosodic focus marking was equally extensive and effective in the presence of syntactic focus marking as without.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33765786     DOI: 10.1121/10.0003594

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  1 in total

1.  Correction by Focus: Cleft Constructions and the Cross-Linguistic Variation in Phonological Form.

Authors:  Markus Greif; Stavros Skopeteas
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-11-29
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.