Banner Portal
Prosodic marking of information status: evidence from brazilian portuguese
PDF

Keywords

Phonetics
Speech production
Information structure
Information status
Brazilian portuguese

How to Cite

1.
Xavier AD. Prosodic marking of information status: evidence from brazilian portuguese. J. of Speech Sci. [Internet]. 2021 Feb. 5 [cited 2024 Feb. 21];4(2):1-15. Available from: https://econtents.bc.unicamp.br/inpec/index.php/joss/article/view/15052
https://doi.org/10.20396/joss.v4i2.15052
PDF

References

Antão C, Arantes P, Cunha Lima ML. Interrelation between subjecthood, referential status and prosody. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the German Linguistic Society – DGfS; 2013. p. 55-56.

Arantes P. Integrando produção e percepção de proeminências numa abordagem dinâmica do ritmo da fala [PhD Thesis]. Campinas: Unicamp; 2010. Available from: http://www.bibliotecadigital. unicamp.br/document/?code=000475903

Avesani C, Vayra M, editors. Accenting, deaccenting and information structure in Italian dialogue. 6th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue; 2005. Available from: http://www.isca-speech.org/ archive_open/sigdial6/sgd6_019.pdf

Baumann S, Martine G. The intonation of accessibility. Journal of Pragmatics. 2006; 38(10): 1636- 1657. Brown G. Prosodic structure and the given/new distinction. Prosody: Models and measurements: Springer; 1983. p. 67-77.

Baumann S. The intonation of givenness. Linguistische Arbeiten 508. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 2006.

Beaver D, Clark B Z, Flemming E, Jaeger TF, Wolters M. When semantics meets phonetics: Acoustical studies of second-occurrence focus. Language. 2007;245-276.

Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program], Version 5.3.56. Amsterdam, Netherlands; 2013. Available from: http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/

Burkhardt P. The syntax-discourse interface: Representing and interpreting dependency. Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 80: John Benjamins Publishing; 2005.

Chafe WL, Li, CN. Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View in Subject and Topic. Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press; 1976. p. 25-55.

Chafe WL. Discourse, consciousness and time: the flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1994.

Cruttenden A. The de-accenting and re-accenting of repeated lexical items. Proceedings of the ESCA Workshop on Prosody. 1993. p. 16–19. Available from: http://www.isca-speech.org/archive_open/ archive_papers/prosody_93/pro3_016.pdf

Cruttenden A. The De-accenting of Given Information: a Cognitive Universal? In: Bernini G, Schwartz ML, editors. Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Language of Europe. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter; 2006. p. 311-355.

Delfino A, Arantes P, Cunha Lima ML. Prosodic marking of referential status in Brazilian Portuguese: a preliminary study. In: Mello H, Pettorino M, Raso T, editors. Proceedings of the VIIth GSCP International Conference; Belo Horizonte. 2012. p. 186-190. Available from: https://www.academia. edu/8465949/Prosodic_marking_of_referential_status_in_Brazilian_Portuguese_a_preliminary_study

Eady SJ, Cooper WE. Speech intonation and focus location in matched statements and questions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1986;80:402.

Féry C, Ishihara S. Interpreting second occurrence focus. Ms., University of Potsdam. 2005. Available from: http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/GEzYTc3N/InterpretingSOF.pdf

Féry C, Kügler F. Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. Journal of Phonetics. 2008;36(4):680-703.

Fowler CA, Housum J. Talkers' signaling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language. 1987;26(5):489-504.

Genzel S, Kügler F. The prosodic expression of contrast in Hindi. Proceedings of Speech Prosody, Chicago; 2010. pp. 10-14. Available from: http://speechprosody2010.illinois.edu/papers/100143.pdf

Görgülü E. On definiteness and specificity in Turkish. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 58; 2009.

Grønnum N. Perceptual invariance in Danish stress group patterns. In Granström B, Nord L, editors, Nordic Prosody VI: Papers from a symposium, Stockholm, August 12-14, 1992. Stockholm: Almqvist. 1993. p. 77-84.

Gundel JK, Hedberg N, Zacharski R. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language. 1993;69(2):274-307.

Gundel JK. The role of topic and comment in linguistic theory: Garland Pub.; 1988.

Gussenhoven C. Intonation and interpretation: phonetics and phonology, Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2002, Aix-en-Provence, 2002. Available from: http://perso.limsi.fr/mareuil/control/ gussenhoven.pdf

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

Halliday M. A. Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2, Journal of Linguistics. 1967; 3(2): 199-244.

Hellmuth S. No De-accenting in (or of) Phrases: Evidence from Arabic for cross-linguistic and crossdialectal prosodic variation. In: Frota S, Vigário M, Freitas, MJ, editors. Prosodies: with special reference to Iberian languages. 2005:99-112.

Kruyt J. Accents from speakers to listeners: an experimental study of the production and perception of accent patterns in Dutch [PhD Thesis]. Leiden: University of Leiden; 1985.

Ladd DR. English compound stress. Proceedings of the Eleventh Meeting of the Northeast Linguistic Society (NELS 11); 1980. Reprinted in Gibbon D, Richter H, editors. Intonation, Accent, and Rhythm. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter; 1984. p. 253-266.

Ladd DR. Intonational Phonology 79: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. Pierrehumbert JB, Hirschberg J. The meaning of intonation contours in the interpretation of discourse. In: Cohen P, Morgan J, Pollack M, editors. Intentions in Communication, Cambridge: MIT Press; 1990. p. 271–311.

Lambrecht K. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge University Press; 1994.

Nolan F, Jónsdóttir, HK. Accentual patterns in Icelandic. In: van Dommelen WA, Fretheim T, editors. Nordic Prosody: Proceedings of the VIII Conference; 2000; Trodheim. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang; 2001. p. 187-198.

Patil U, Kentner G, Gollrad A, Kügler F, Féry C, Vasishth S. Focus, word order and intonation in Hindi. Journal of South Asian Linguistics. 2008;1(1): 55-72.

Prince, EF. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In: Cole P, editor. Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press; 1981.

R: A language and environment for statistical computing. [computer program]. Version 3.0.2. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2013. Available from: http://www.r-project.org/

Swerts M, Krahmer E, Avesani C. Prosodic marking of information status in Dutch and Italian: A comparative analysis. Journal of Phonetics. 2002;30(4):629-54.

Swerts M. Contrast and accent in Dutch and Romanian. Journal of Phonetics. 2007;35(3):380-397.

Terken J, Hirschberg J. Deaccentuation of words representing ‘given’ information: effects of persistence of grammatical function and surface position. Language and Speech. 1994;37(2):125-145.

Thorsen NG. Intonation and text in Standard Danish. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1985;77:1205.

Valgeirsson G. The Re-accenting of Given Information in Icelandic. 2011. Available from: http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/7354/19650/1/G%C3%ADsli_Valgeirsson_ba.pdf

Wolters M. Prosodic correlates of referent status. Proceedings of the ICPHS; San Francisco; 1999. Available from: http://www.academia.edu/2783130/Prosodic_correlates_of_referent_status

Xu Y. Effects of tone and focus on the formation and alignment of f0 contours. Journal of Phonetics. 1999;27(1):55-105.

Creative Commons License

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

Copyright (c) 2014 Alexandre Delfino Xavier

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.