The interaction of tone, sonority, and prosodic structure

Lacy, Paul de

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511486371.013

Cited by 127 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has also been proposed that explanations be based directly on the acoustic and articulatory covariates of sonority rather than on sonority per se (Ohala, 1990; Kawasaki-Fukumori, 1992; Wright, 2004; Oudeyer, 2005). Nonetheless, the explanatory value of sonority has frequently been defended in accounts of syllable structure (Vennemann, 1972; Hooper, 1976; Steriade, 1982; Selkirk, 1984; Prince & Smolensky, 1993/2004; Smolensky, 2006); syllable contact (Vennemann, 1972, Gouskova, 2001; Gouskova, 2004); stress assignment (de Lacy, 2007) reduplication (Pinker & Birdsong, 1979; Steriade, 1982; Steriade, 1988; Morelli, 1999; Parker, 2002) and the choice of repair strategy for marked structures (Hooper, 1976). …”

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listeners' knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from nasal clusters

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Optimality Theory explains typological markedness implications by proposing that all speakers possess universal constraints penalizing marked structure, irrespective of the evidence provided by their language (Prince & Smolensky, 1993). An account of phonological perception sketched here entails that markedness constraints reveal their presence by inducing perceptual 'repairs' to structures ungrammatical in the hearer's language. As onset clusters of falling sonority are typologically marked relative to those of rising sonority (Greenberg, 1978), we examine English speakers' perception of nasal-initial clusters-lacking in English. We find greater accuracy for rising-sonority clusters, evidencing knowledge of markedness constraints favoring such onset clusters. The misperception of sonority falls cannot be accounted for by stimulus artifacts (the materials are perceived accurately by speakers of Russian-a language allowing nasal-initial clusters) nor by phonetic failure (English speakers misperceive falls even with printed materials) nor by putative relations of such onsets to the statistics of the English lexicon.

show abstract

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Listeners' knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from nasal clusters

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it has to be highlighted that markedness of the opposing items of the concept pair is relative rather than absolute issue. Given that, in phonetics, the marked phonetic structures are less natural, more effortful (i.e., harder to articulate), less common, less expected and perceptually more salient (De Lacy, 2007), it would be plausible to assume that at least in the present experimental set up, the high-pitched vocalization was more likely to be marked than the low-pitched vocalization. That is, because the vocalizations were produced significantly faster in low pitch than in high pitch, thus supporting the view that the low-pitched vocalization required less articulatory effort than producing the highpitched vocalization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The Influence of Number Magnitude on Vocal Responses

Vainio

Mustonen

Vainio

2018

Journal of Motor Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study investigated whether number magnitude can influence vocal responses. Participants produced either short or long version of the vowel [ɑ] (Experiment 1), or high or low-pitched version of that vowel (Experiment 2), according to the parity of a visually presented number. In addition to measuring reaction times (RT) of vocal responses, we measured the intensity, the fundamental frequency (f) and the first and second formants of the vocalization. The RTs showed that the long and high-pitched vocal responses were associated with large numbers, while short and low-pitched vocal responses were associated with small numbers. It was also found that high-pitched vocalizations were mapped with the odd numbers, while the low-pitched vocalizations were mapped with the even numbers. Finally, large numbers increased the f values. The study shows systematic interactions between the processes that represent number magnitude and produce vocal responses.

show abstract

“…A number of languages categorize syllables based on vowel centrality, height, or (underlying) reducedness (e.g., de Lacy, ; Gordon, ; Nevins & Plaster, ; cf., de Lacy, ) . In such cases, the heavier (i.e., more stress‐attracting) vowels are usually more open or peripheral, suggesting that their weight may correlate with greater duration (see, however, de Lacy, , p. 294 for counter‐evidence). More generally, greater weight correlates with (if anything) greater sonority.…”

Section: Weight‐sensitive Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological weight

Ryan

2016

Language and Linguist. Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grammars frequently categorize syllables for prosodic purposes, treating one class as heavier (e.g., more stress‐attracting) than another. While such categorization is usually dichotomous, complex and gradient scales are also attested, with various organizational criteria. This article reviews the range of phenomena that invoke weight distinctions and introduces some current debates concerning weight, touching on topics such as the syllable versus interval as the domain of weight, rich scalarity, process and position specificities, the role of onsets, the phonetic basis of categorization, and the mora.

show abstract

The interaction of tone, sonority, and prosodic structure

Cited by 127 publications

References 0 publications

Listeners' knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from nasal clusters

Listeners' knowledge of phonological universals: evidence from nasal clusters

The Influence of Number Magnitude on Vocal Responses

Phonological weight

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About