This study addresses the relationship between information structure and intonation in French. Using an interactive speech production experiment, it tests the hypothesis that the French initial rise (LHi) is used to mark the left edge of a contrastively focused constituent. Since the occurrence of the initial rise is also known to be sensitive to the length of an Accentual Phrase (AP), AP length was manipulated within the same experiment in a 2 × 2 design. This made it possible to explore the issue of whether the initial rise represents a true marker of focus in the traditional sense, or whether the association is less direct. The results show that focus and phrase length make contributions to the distribution of the initial rise, but with no interaction. It is argued that these findings are incompatible with a model that assumes a direct mapping between focus and the initial rise, and that the relatively weak association can nevertheless be informative in a model of interpretation that integrates multiple probabilistic inputs to initial rise occurrence. These findings represent the first quantitative experimental assessment of focus realization in French in a non-corrective context, and establish a previously undocumented link between the initial rise and discourse-level meaning.
AstésanoC. (2001). Rythme et accentuation en Français. Invariance et variabilité stylistique. Paris: Editions L’Harmattan.
2.
AstésanoC.BardE. G.TurkA. (2007). Structural influences on initial accent placement in French. Language and Speech, 50(3), 423–446.
3.
BeyssadeC.Delais-RoussarieE.MarandinJ. M. (2007). The prosody of interrogatives in French. Nouveaux cahiers de linguistique Française, 28, 163–175.
4.
BishopJ. (2013). Prenuclear accentuation in English: Phonetics, phonology, information structure. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
5.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2012). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5.3.50, Available at: http://www.praat.org/ (accessed 21 May 2013).
6.
BüringD. (2003). On D-trees, beans, and B-accents. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26(5), 511–545.
7.
CalhounS. (2010). The centrality of metrical structure in signalling information structure: A probabilistic perspective. Language, 86(1), 1–42.
8.
Clech-DarbonA.RebuschiG.RiallandA. (1998). Are there cleft sentences in French? In RebuschiG.TullerL (Eds.), The grammar of focus (pp. 83–118). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
9.
CulicoverP. W.RochemontM. (1983). Stress and focus in English. Language59 (1), 123–165.
10.
DelaisE. (1995). Pour une approche parallele de la structure prosodique: Etude de l’organisation prosodique et rythmique de la phrase Française. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.
11.
DelattreP. (1966). Les dix intonations de base du français. The French Review, 40(1), 1–14.
12.
DellF. (1984). L’accentuation dans les phrases en français. In DellF.HirstD.VergnaudJ.-R (Eds.), Forme sonore du langage; structure des représentations en phonologie (pp. 65–122). Paris: Hermann.
13.
Di CristoA. (1998). Intonation in French. In HirstD.Di CristoA (Eds.), Intonation systems: A survey of twenty languages (pp. 195–218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Di CristoA. (1999). Vers une modelisation de l’accentuation du francais: Premiere partie. Journal of French Language Studies, 9, 143–180.
15.
Di CristoA. (2000). Vers une modélisation de l’accentuation du français (seconde partie). Journal of French Language Studies, 10, 27–44.
16.
Di CristoA.JankowskiL. (1999). Prosodic organisation and phrasing after focus in French. In Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1565–1568). San Francisco, USA.
17.
D’ImperioM.MichelasA. (2014). Pitch scaling and the internal structure of the intonation phrase in French. Phonology, 31, 95–122.
18.
DohenM. (2005). Deixis Prosodique Multisensorielle: Production et Perception Audiovisuelle de la Focalisation Contrastive en Français. Doctoral dissertation, Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble.
19.
DohenM.LœvenbruckH. (2004). Pre-focal rephrasing, focal enhancement and post-focal deaccentuation in French. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (Vol. 1, pp. 785–788). Jeju Island, Korea.
20.
Erteschik-ShirN. (1986). Wh-questions and focus. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9(2), 117–149.
21.
FéryC. (2001). Intonation of focus in French. In FéryC.SternefeldW. (Eds.), Audiatur Vox Sapientes: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (pp. 153–181). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
22.
FleissJ. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
23.
FónagyI. (1980). L’accent en français: Accent probabilitaire. In FónagyI.LéonP. (Eds.), l’accent en Français contemporain (pp. 123–233). Paris: Didier.
24.
FougeronC.KeatingP. A. (1997). Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3728–3740.
25.
GermanJ.D’ImperioM. (2009). Information structure and the alignment of phrasal features in French qu-interrogatives. Poster presented at Interfaces Discours et Prosodie, Paris, 2009.
26.
GermanJ.PierrehumbertJ.KaufmanS. (2006). Evidence for phonological constraints on nuclear accent placement. Language, 82(1), 151–168.
27.
GoldmanJ. P. (2011). EasyAlign: an automatic phonetic alignment tool under Praat. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2011 (pp. 3233–3236), Florence, Italy.
28.
GussenhovenC. (1983). Focus, mode and the nucleus. Journal of Linguistics, 19(02), 377–417.
29.
GussenhovenC. (2004). The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
HamblinC. L. (1973). Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10(1), 41–53.
31.
HamlaouiF. (2011). On the role of phonology and discourse in Francilian French wh-questions. Journal of Linguistics, 47(1), 129–162.
32.
JankowskiL.AstésanoC.Di CristoA. (1999). The initial rhythmic accent in French: Acoustic data and perceptual investigation. In Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 257–260). San Francisco, USA.
33.
JunS. A. (2011). Prosodic marking of Complex NP Focus, Syntax, and the Pre-/Post-focus String. In WashburnM. B.McKinney-BockK.VarisE.SawyerA.TomaszewiczB. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 214–230). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
34.
JunS. A.FougeronC. (1995). The accentual phrase and the prosodic structure of French. In Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 722–725). Stockholm, Sweden.
35.
JunS. A.FougeronC. (2000). A phonological model of French intonation. In BotinisA (Ed.), Intonation: Analysis, Modelling and Technology (pp. 209–242). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
36.
JunS. A.FougeronC. (2002). Realizations of accentual phrase in French intonation. Probus, 14(1), 147–172.
37.
KrifkaM. (2001). For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. In FéryC.SternefeldW. (Eds.), Audiatur vox sapientes: A festschrift for arnim von stechow (pp. 287–319). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
38.
KrifkaM. (2007). Basic notions of information structure. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure, 6(2007), 13–55.
39.
LambrechtK.MichaelisL. A. (1998). Sentence accent in information questions: Default and projection. Linguistics and Philosophy, 21(5), 477–544.
40.
LaddD. R. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
LandisJ. R.KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
42.
LucciV. (1983). Etude phonétique du Français contemporain à travers la variation situationnelle (débit, rythme, accent, intonation, e muet, liaisons, phonèmes). Grenoble: Publications de l’Université des Langues et Lettres de Grenoble.
43.
MertensP. (1992) L’accentuation de syllabes contiguës. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 95/96, 145–165.
44.
MichelasA. (2011). Caractérisation phonétique et phonologique du syntagme intermédiaire en Français: De la production à la perception. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Provence-Aix-Marseille I.
45.
MichelasA.GermanJ. (2012). Prosodic boundary strength and focus marking in French: The need of a minimal intermediate phrase boundary at the right edge of focus regions. Poster presented at Tone and Intonation in Europe 5, Oxford, UK.
46.
NewB.PallierC.BrysbaertM.FerrandL. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 516–524.
47.
PasdeloupV. (1990). Modèle de règles rythmiques du Français appliqué à la synthèse de la parole. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Provence.
48.
PierrehumbertJ.BeckmanM. (1988). Japanese tone structure. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, (15), 1–282.
49.
PortesC.D’ImperioM.LanciaL. (2012). Positional constraints on the initial rise in French. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2012, Shanghai, China.
50.
PostB. (2000). Tonal and phrasal structures in French intonation. The Hague: Thesus.
51.
RietveldA. C. M. (1980). Word boundaries in the French language. Language and Speech, 23(3), 289–296.
52.
RobertsC. (1996). Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In YoonJ. H.KatholA (Eds.), The Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 49: Papers in Semantics (pp. 91–136). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
53.
RoothM. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1(1), 75–116.
54.
RossiM. (1981). Intonation, énonciation, syntaxe. In RossiM.Di CristoA.HirstD.MartinP.NishinumaY. (Eds.), L’intonation: de l’acoustique à la sémantique (pp. 184–233). Paris: Klincksieck.
55.
SchwarzschildR. (1999). Givenness, AvoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural Language Semantics, 7(2), 141–177.
56.
SelkirkE. O. (1986). Phonology and syntax: The relationship between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57.
SelkirkE. (1995). Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress, and phrasing. In GoldsmithJ. (Ed.), The Handbook of Phonological Theory (pp. 550–69). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
58.
SmithC. L. (2002). Prosodic finality and sentence type in French. Language and Speech, 45(2), 141–178.
59.
von StechowA. (1991). Focusing and backgrounding operators. In AbrahamW. (Ed.), Discourse Particles: Descriptive and Theoretical Investigations on the Logical, Syntactic and Pragmatic Properties of Discourse Particles in German (pp. 37–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
60.
TouatiP. (1987). Structures prosodiques du suédois et du Français: Profils Temporels et configurations tonales. Lund: Lund University Press.
61.
VaissièreJ. (1974). On French prosody. Quaterly Progress Report, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 114, 212–223.
62.
WelbyP. (2003). Effects of pitch accent type and status on focus projection. Language and Speech, 46(1), 53–81.
63.
WelbyP. (2006). French intonational structure: Evidence from tonal alignment. Journal of Phonetics, 34(3), 343–371.
64.
YoonT.ChavarriaS.ColeJ.Hasegawa-JohnsonM. (2004). Intertranscriber reliability of prosodic labeling on telephone conversation using ToBI. In Proceedings of the ISCA International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (Interspeech 2004) (pp. 2729–2732), Jeju Island, Korea.
