Situational influences on rhythmicity in speech, music, and their interaction

Abstract

Brain processes underlying the production and perception of rhythm indicate considerable flexibility in how physical signals are interpreted. This paper explores how that flexibility might play out in rhythmicity in speech and music. There is much in common across the two domains, but there are also significant differences. Interpretations are explored that reconcile some of the differences, particularly with respect to how functional properties modify the rhythmicity of speech, within limits imposed by its structural constraints. Functional and structural differences mean that music is typically more rhythmic than speech, and that speech will be more rhythmic when the emotions are more strongly engaged, or intended to be engaged. The influence of rhythmicity on attention is acknowledged, and it is suggested that local increases in rhythmicity occur at times when attention is required to coordinate joint action, whether in talking or music-making. Evidence is presented which suggests that while these short phases of heightened rhythmical behaviour are crucial to the success of transitions in communicative interaction, their modality is immaterial: they all function to enhance precise temporal prediction and hence tightly coordinated joint action.

Evidence for a rhythm perception deficit in children who stutter

“…The rhythmic sense of beat in speech has been proposed to be the main coordinating level of speech production planning (e.g., Martin, 1972). Although produced speech is seldom overtly rhythmic due to various situational factors (Cummins & Port, 1998; Hawkins, 2014; Tilsen, 2013; Wagner & Watson, 2010), clear evidence exists for the relevance of the regular rhythmic structures for fluent speech production. These considerations suggest that planning speech rhythm constitutes part of the feedforward process for speech production (Levelt, 1993).…”

Regularity in speech rhythm as a social coalition signal

“…Patterns of syllabic rhythm, based on the variability of syllable and vowel durations, depend on situational context and vary in the degree of isochrony not only between, but also within languages . Lower variance in durational ratios is found for utterances with a more regular pulse (vowel onsets).…”

“…26,34 The temporal distribution of vowel onsets may vary within languages in order to enhance temporal prediction and coordinate joint action. 35 A regular distribution of pulses should then facilitate temporal prediction of an upcoming event, preparation of the response, and enhance attention to the sensory input. 36,37 In speech production, rhythmic convergence can be achieved via temporal regularity of the vocalizations by adjustment of the phases of vowel onsets.…”

“…Although Dauer suggested that such rhythmic differences are merely automatic consequences of linguistic circumstances, further studies showed that even when linguistic factors are controlled, rhythmic differences between languages still persist . The temporal distribution of vowel onsets may vary within languages in order to enhance temporal prediction and coordinate joint action . A regular distribution of pulses should then facilitate temporal prediction of an upcoming event, preparation of the response, and enhance attention to the sensory input …”

Music and Language in Social Interaction: Synchrony, Antiphony, and Functional Origins

“…Thus, both the isochrony and synchrony natural of music, in comparison to their dearth in spoken language, embody the most straightforward distinction between music, and language. That said, there is no perfect division, since tempo in speech can be highly flexible in adult conversation, more periodic in child-directed speech, poetry and oration, and nearly isochronous in rap, chanting, or song (Hawkins, 2014; Menninghaus et al, 2015; Obermeier et al, 2016). Thus, there is a continuum from strict isochrony and synchrony in both music and language, with different styles occupying different places along this spectrum (Kotz et al, 2018).…”