The prosody of rhetorical questions in English

Abstract

This article contributes to our knowledge about the prosodic realisation of rhetorical questions (RQs) as compared to information-seeking questions (ISQs). It reports on a production experiment testing the prosody of English wh- and polar RQs and ISQs in a Canadian variety. In previous literature, the contribution of prosody to the distinction between the two illocution types has often been limited to the intonational realisation of the terminus of the utterance, i.e. whether it ends in a rise or a fall. Along with edge tones, we tested other phonological and phonetic parameters. Our results are as follows: (i) The intonational terminus was distinctive only for polar questions (rise vs plateau), not for wh-questions (low throughout). (ii) Moreover, the semantic difference between RQs and ISQs is signalled by pitch accents. It is reflected in nuclear pitch accent type for wh-questions, and accent type and position for polar questions. (iii) Phonetically, RQs are produced with longer constituent durations and – for wh-questions – a softer voice quality in the wh-word. Taken together, several intonational categories and phonetic parameters contribute to the distinction between RQs and ISQs. A simple distinction between rising and falling intonation is in any case insufficient.

The prosody of rhetorical vs. information-seeking questions in Icelandic

“…(ii) Phonologically, the type of nuclear pitch accent does, but the boundary tone does not, contribute to this distinction. (iii) Phonetically, based on previous findings in related experiments for English [27] and German [25], [26], we predict longer durations in RQs as compared to ISQs in the prenuclear and nuclear region of the utterance.…”

“…Specifically they show (i) that edge tones distinguish between ISQs and RQs only in polar questions (wh-questions have L-L% throughout), (ii) that the type and -in polar questions -the position of the nuclear accent is important, and (iii) that phonetically, longer constituent durations are found in RQs than in ISQs. [27] also show in a perception study that listeners are able to identify the intended illocution based on prosodic realization alone.…”

“…A preliminary study for German identifies phonological and phonetic differences between ISQs and RQs, specifically differences in the distribution of boundary tones and nuclear pitch accent types, longer durations in RQs than ISQs, and more breathy voice quality in RQs [25], [26]. Yet more recently, [27] find similar results for English. Specifically they show (i) that edge tones distinguish between ISQs and RQs only in polar questions (wh-questions have L-L% throughout), (ii) that the type and -in polar questions -the position of the nuclear accent is important, and (iii) that phonetically, longer constituent durations are found in RQs than in ISQs.…”

“…Twenty-one pairs of wh-and polar interrogatives were constructed, as well as accompanying contexts (one context triggering an information-seeking, one a rhetorical interpretation, for each question pair). Target interrogatives and contexts were translated from English [27] as closely as possible by a native speaker of Icelandic. Each question was felicitous in both an information-seeking context and a rhetorical one, resulting in 21 quadruples, see Tables 1 and 2 below (contexts in Tables 1 and 2 are translated from Icelandic).…”

“…Of the 32 participants, all participants aged 20-32 (N=21) entered the analysis. This was done to keep the age range of participants comparable to parallel studies on English [27] and German [26]. Four participants were removed from the analysis due to missing files or because they changed the wording of more than one target interrogative.…”