Prosodic planning: Effects of phrasal length and complexity on pause duration

Krivokapic, Jelena

doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2006.04.001

Cited by 127 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The first is the length of the adjacent words, which has been argued to correlate with prosodic boundary strength (cf. Ferreira, 1991;Krivokapić, 2007;Watson & Gibson, 2004). Griffin (2003) reports that when planning a two-word sequence, the latency before the utterance increases when the first word is shorter.…”

Section: Other Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are many measures of prosodic boundary strength, and for simplicity we will focus in this paper on the presence and duration of pauses (Goldman-Eisler, 1972;Grosjean & Collins, 1979;Kendall, 2013;Krivokapić, 2007;Price et al, 1991). In sociolinguistic literature on CSD, a following pause is treated as an environment on par with that of a following consonant or a following vowel.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Production planning and coronal stop deletion in spontaneous speech

Tanner

Sonderegger

Wagner

2017

Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many phonological processes can be affected by segmental context spanning word boundaries, which often lead to variable outcomes. This paper tests the idea that some of this variability can be explained by reference to production planning. We examine coronal stop deletion (CSD), a variable process conditioned by preceding and upcoming phonological context, in a corpus of spontaneous British English speech, as a means of investigating a number of variables associated with planning: Prosodic boundary strength, word frequency, conditional probability of the following word, and speech rate. From the perspective of production planning, (1) prosodic boundaries should affect deletion rate independently of following context; (2) given the locality of production planning, the effect of the following context should decrease at stronger prosodic boundaries; and (3) other factors affecting planning scope should modulate the effect of upcoming phonological material above and beyond the modulating effect of prosodic boundaries. We build a statistical model of CSD realization, using pause length as a quantitative proxy for boundary strength, and find support for these predictions. These findings are compatible with the hypothesis that the locality of production planning constrains variability in speech production, and have practical implications for work on CSD and other variable processes.

show abstract

Section: Other Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Production planning and coronal stop deletion in spontaneous speech

Tanner

Sonderegger

Wagner

2017

Laboratory Phonology: Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Speakers seem to exercise some sort of top-down control over segment or syllable duration and have a tendency to avoid having a too long or short linguistic unit [54]. In addition, the duration of pause within an utterance is affected by not only the length of its preceding phrase but also that of the following phrase in read speech [55,56].…”

Section: Rhythm Versus Linguistic Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Speech rhythm: a metaphor?

Nolan

Jeon

2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is speech rhythmic? In the absence of evidence for a traditional view that languages strive to coordinate either syllables or stress-feet with regular time intervals, we consider the alternative that languages exhibit contrastive rhythm subsisting merely in the alternation of stronger and weaker elements. This is initially plausible, particularly for languages with a steep 'prominence gradient', i.e. a large disparity between stronger and weaker elements; but we point out that alternation is poorly achieved even by a 'stress-timed' language such as English, and, historically, languages have conspicuously failed to adopt simple phonological remedies that would ensure alternation. Languages seem more concerned to allow 'syntagmatic contrast' between successive units and to use durational effects to support linguistic functions than to facilitate rhythm. Furthermore, some languages (e.g. Tamil, Korean) lack the lexical prominence which would most straightforwardly underpin prominence of alternation. We conclude that speech is not incontestibly rhythmic, and may even be antirhythmic. However, its linguistic structure and patterning allow the metaphorical extension of rhythm in varying degrees and in different ways depending on the language, and it is this analogical process which allows speech to be matched to external rhythms.

show abstract

“…For instance, it has been shown that the duration of the pause preceding an utterance is longer when the following utterance is longer or syntactically/prosodically more complex (Cooper & PacciaCooper, 1981;Zvonik & Cummins, 2003;Krivokapić, 2007). These findings are accounted for in terms of planning, since it is assumed that the speakers employ the pause before utterance onset to plan the upcoming utterance.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%