Interspeech 2013 2013
DOI: 10.21437/interspeech.2013-91
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prosody of contrastive focus in estonian

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 6 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Rochemont (2016: 45). In Estonian, prefocal given information has been found to be accented (Sahkai & Mihkla 2017), while post-focal elements following a contrastive focus have been found to be predominantly deaccented (Sahkai et al 2013). Therefore, the target words were elicited post-focally in the present work, although the post-focal position may induce other undesirable effects like the compression of pitch range (cf.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Rochemont (2016: 45). In Estonian, prefocal given information has been found to be accented (Sahkai & Mihkla 2017), while post-focal elements following a contrastive focus have been found to be predominantly deaccented (Sahkai et al 2013). Therefore, the target words were elicited post-focally in the present work, although the post-focal position may induce other undesirable effects like the compression of pitch range (cf.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 68%