This study reports a finding about vocal expressions of emotion in Mandarin Chinese. Production and perception experiments used the same tone and mixed tone sequences to test whether pitch variation is restricted due to the presence of lexical tones. Results showed that the restriction of pitch variation occurred in all high level tone sequences (tone 1 group) with the expression of happiness but did not happen for other dynamic tone groups. However, perception analysis revealed that all the emotions in every tone group received high identification rates; this indicates that listeners used other cues for encoding happiness in the tone 1 group. This study demonstrates that the restriction of pitch variation does not affect the perception of vocal emotions.

We examined the production and perception of (contrastive) prosodic focus, using a paradigm based on digit strings, in which the same material and discourse contexts can be used in different languages. We found a striking difference between languages like English and Mandarin Chinese, where prosodic focus is clearly marked in production and accurately recognized in perception, and languages like Korean, where prosodic focus is neither clearly marked in production nor accurately recognized in perception. We also present comparable production data for Suzhou Wu, Japanese, and French.

This study reports experimental results on whether the acoustic realization of vocal emotions differs between Mandarin and English. Prosodic cues, spectral cues and articulatory cues generated by electroglottograph (EGG) of five emotions (anger, fear, happiness, sadness and neutral) were compared within and across Mandarin and English through a production experiment. Results of within-language comparison demonstrated that each vocal emotion had specific acoustic patterns in each language. Moreover, normalized data were used in the across-language comparison analysis. Results indicated that Mandarin and English showed different mechanisms of utilizing pitch for encoding emotions. The differences in pitch variation between neutral and other emotions were significantly larger in English than in Mandarin. However, the variations of speech rate and certain phonation cues (e.g., CPP (Cepstral Peak Prominence) and CQ (Contact quotient)) were significantly greater in Mandarin than in English. The differences in emotional speech between the two languages may be due to the restriction of pitch variation by the presence of lexical tones in Mandarin. This study reveals an interesting finding that occurs when a certain cue (e.g., pitch) is restricted in one language, other cues were strengthened to take on the responsibility of differentiating vocal emotions. Therefore, we posit that the acoustic realizations of emotional speech are multidimensional.

Using production and perception experiments, this study examined whether the prosodic structure inherent to telephone numbers in Tokyo Japanese affects the realization of focus prosody as well as its perception. It was hypothesized that prosodic marking of focus differs by position within the digit groups of phone number strings. Overall, focus prosody of telephone numbers was not clearly marked, resulting in poor identification in perception. However, a difference between positions within digit groups was identified, reflecting a prosodic structure where one position is assigned an accentual peak instead of the other. The findings suggest that, conforming to a language-specific prosodic structure, focus prosody within a language can vary under the influence of a particular linguistic environment.

This study characterized focused tones in Mandarin Chinese through a production experiment using phone number strings. The results revealed that, although phonation cues had little effect on any focused tone, prosodic cues exhibited various patterns of distribution. Duration played an important role for each focused tone, but intensity had a relatively less salient role. Among pitch-related parameters, the raising of pitch register was an important cue when a level tone (tone 1) was focused. By contrast, due to the interaction between tone and intonation, absolute slope and pitch range had less effect on tone 1 focus. These cues, however, were prominent when contour tones (tones 2 and 4) were in focus. Unlike other focused tones that raised pitch, tone 3 focus exhibited the opposite pattern, lowering its pitch target. In the aggregation of all focused tones, it was found that only primarily pitch-related parameters were selected as the main variables discriminating one from another. The results of this study, therefore, suggest that the prosodic marking of focus is not uniform, even within a single language, but clearly differs by tone type. Accordingly, prosodic marking of focus should be considered multimodal in a tonal language.