Banner Portal
Perception of expressive prosodic speech acts performed in USA english by L1 and L2 speakers
PDF

Keywords

Prosody
Attitude
Cross-cultural comparison
Multimodal perception

How to Cite

1.
Rilliard A, Erickson D, Moraes JA de, Shochi T. Perception of expressive prosodic speech acts performed in USA english by L1 and L2 speakers. J. of Speech Sci. [Internet]. 2017 Nov. 1 [cited 2024 Jul. 21];6(1):27-45. Available from: https://econtents.bc.unicamp.br/inpec/index.php/joss/article/view/14981

Abstract

Attitudes have been described for different languages, with varying labels or contexts of occurrence for same labels. It renders cross-cultural comparison uncertain. A corpus was designed to bypass these limitations. This paper focuses on USA English produced by L1 and L2 speakers. The best performances in 9 attitudes are used in a forced-choice test, in both audio and visual modalities. Results show that 6 categories group the presented attitudes in coherent sets. The cultural origin affects marginally the categorisation of the expressions. An acoustic analysis of the fundamental frequency and intensity allows to test the predictions of two theoretical propositions – the Frequency code and the Effort code. It concludes to a main coherence of cross-language expressivity, and discusses differences. For negative expressions of imposition, L1 speakers follow the Frequency code – and L1 listeners expect this; L2 speakers use the Effort code in the same situations, leading to confusions in the audio-only modality. Differences for seduction and irony are also discussed.

https://doi.org/10.20396/joss.v6i1.14981
PDF

References

Abdi H, Béra M. Correspondence analysis. In: Alhajj R, Rokne J, editors. Encyclopedia of Social Networks and Mining. New York: Springer Verlag; 2014. p. 275-284.

Banse R, Scherer KR. Acoustic profiles in vocal emotion expression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996:70:614–636.

Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (version 5.3.32) [computer program]. retrieved October 17, 2012.

Bryant GA. Verbal irony in the wild. Pragmatics & Cognition. 2011:19(2):291-309.

Crawley MJ. The R book. John Wiley & Sons; 2012.

Damasio, AR. Emotion in the perspective of an integrated nervous system. Brain research reviews. 1998:26(2):83-86.

Daneš F. Involvement with language and in language. Journal of pragmatics. 1994:22(3-4):251-264.

Goudbeek M, Scherer K. Beyond arousal: Valence and potency/control cues in the vocal expression of emotion. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2010:128(3):1322-1336.

Gussenhoven C. The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.

Henrich, N, d'Alessandro, C, Doval, B, Castellengo, M. Glottal open quotient in singing: Measurements and correlation with laryngeal mechanisms, vocal intensity, and fundamental frequency. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2005:117(3):1417-1430.

Hill B, Ide S, Ikuta S, Kawasaki A, Ogino T. Universals of linguistic politeness: Quantitative Evidence from Japanese and American English. Journal of Pragmatics. 1986:10:347-371.

Husson F, Josse J, Le S, Mazet J. FactoMineR: Multivariate Exploratory Data Analysis and Data Mining with R. R package version 1.27. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FactoMineR. 2014.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2005). Politeness in France: How to buy bread politely. In: Hickey L, Stewart M, editors. Politeness in Europe. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters; p. 29-44.

Lamesch S, Doval B, Castellengo M. Towards a more informative Voice Range Profile: the role of laryngeal vibratory mechanisms on vowels dynamic range. Journal of Voice. 2012:26(5):672.e9-672.e18.

Lebart L, Morineau A, Piron M. Statistique exploratoire multidimensionnelle. Paris: Dunod; 2000.

Léon, P. Précis de phonostylistique: parole et expressivité. Paris: Nathan; 1993.

Liénard, JS, Di Benedetto, MG. Effect of vocal effort on spectral properties of vowels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1999:106(1):411-422.

Liénard J-S, Barras C. Fine-grain voice strength estimation from vowel spectral cues. In: Proceedings of Interspeech; 2013 Aug 25-29; Lyon. ISCA; 2013, 128-132.

de Moraes, JA, Rilliard, A. Illocution, attitudes and prosody: A multimodal analysis. In: Raso, T, Ribeiro De Mello, H, editors. Spoken Corpora and Linguistic Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2014. p. 233-270.

de Moraes, JA, Rilliard, A. Prosody and Emotion. In: Armstrong, ME, Henriksen, N, del Mar Vanrell, M, editors. Interdisciplinary approaches to intonational grammar in Ibero-Romance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publisher; 2016. p. 135-152.

Ohala JJ. Cross-language use of pitch: an ethological view. Phonetica. 1983:40(1):1-18.

Ohala JJ. An ethological perspective on common cross - language utilization of f0 of voice. Phonetica. 1984:41(1):1-16.

Ohala JJ. The frequency code underlies the sound symbolic use of voice pitch. In: Hinton L, Nichols J, Ohala JJ, editors. Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. p. 325-347.

R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. URL http://www.R-project.org/. 2014.

Rilliard A, Erickson D, Shochi T, de Moraes JA. Social face to face communication – American English attitudinal prosody. In: Proceedings of Interspeech; 2013 Aug 25-29; Lyon. ISCA; 2013, 1648-1652.

Rilliard A, Erickson D, Shochi T, de Moraes JA. US English attitudinal prosody performances in L1 and L2 speakers. In: Proceedings of Speech Prosody; 2014 May 20-23; Dublin. ISCA; 2014, 895-899.

Sadanobu T. A natural history of Japanese pressed voice. Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan. 2004:8(1):29-44.

Scherer KR. Vocal affect expression as symptom, symbol, and appeal. In: Papousek H, Jürgens U, Papousek M, editors. Nonverbal vocal communication: Comparative and developmental approaches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992. p. 43-60.

Scherer KR, Wranik T, Sangsue J, Tran V, Scherer U. Emotions in everyday life: Probability of occurrence, risk factors, appraisal and reaction patterns. Social Science Information. 2004:43(4):499-570.

Scherer KR, Wallbott HG. Evidence for universality and cultural variation of differential emotion response patterning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994:66:310-328.

Shochi T, Rilliard A, Aubergé V, Erickson D. Intercultural perception of English, French and Japanese social affective prosody. In: Hancil S, editor. The role of prosody in affective speech. Bern: Germany; 2009. Linguistic Insights. 97; p. 189-220.

Traunmüller, H, Eriksson, A. Acoustic effects of variation in vocal effort by men, women, and children. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2000:107(6): 3438-3451.

Wichmann, A. The attitudinal effects of prosody, and how they relate to emotion. In: Proceedings of the ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop (ITRW) on Speech and Emotion; 2000 September 5-7; Newcastle. ISCA; 2000, 143-148.

Wierzbicka A. A semantic metalanguage for a cross-cultural comparison of speech acts and speech genres. Language in Society 1985:14(4):491-513.

Wierzbicka A. Defining Emotion Concepts. Cognitive Science. 1992:6:539-581.

Wierzbicka A. Japanese cultural scripts: Cultural psychology and “cultural grammar”. Ethos. 1996:24(3):527-555.

Wierzbicka A. Empirical Universals of Language as a Basis for the Study of Other Human Universals and as a Tool for Exploring Cross-Cultural Differences. Ethos. 2005:33(2):256-291.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2017 Donna Erickson, Albert Rilliard, João Antônio de Moraes, Takaaki Shochi

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.