Persian polar questions are characterized by a rise-fall followed by a low F0 plateau and a final rise. A production experiment was designed which systematically manipulated question length and the position of stress in the nuclear accented word in the question. Results revealed that distances between tones can strongly affect their scaling and alignment in predictable manner. With respect to scaling, our data show that the postnuclear low F0 target is realized considerably higher in short questions in which tonal crowding is more acute. This scaling adjustment of the L affects the following H tone, such that the final H is realized higher in tonal space, relative to the other crowding contexts. The results for duration show that in short questions, syllable duration is significantly lengthened so that there is room for tonal targets to be realized. In addition, the alignment data in this study suggest that crowding contexts incrementally affect the temporal adjustment of tonal targets. In some circumstances, tonal crowding results in anticipatory retraction of tones, while in others it results in carry-over tonal displacement depending on the direction of the prosodic pressure. These results can best be explained in an auto-segmental approach to intonational phonology in which intonation contours are treated as strings of distinct high and low tones associated with specific elements in the segmental string.
ArvanitiA. (1998). Phrase accents revisited: Comparative evidence from Standard and Cypriot Greek. In 4th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 2883–2886). Australian Speech Science and Technology Association.
ArvanitiA.LaddD. R.MennenI. (1998). Stability of tonal alignment: The case of Greek prenuclear accents. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 3–25.
4.
ArvanitiA.LaddD. R.MennenI. (2000). What is a starred tone? Evidence from Greek. In BroeM.PierrehumbertJ. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology V (pp. 119–131). Cambridge University Press.
5.
ArvanitiA.LaddD. R.MennenI. (2006). Phonetic effects of focus and “tonal crowding” in intonation: Evidence from Greek polar questions. Speech Communication, 48, 667–696.
6.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
7.
BatesD.MaechlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed–effects models using Eigen and S4 (R Package Version 1.0-6). http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
CaspersJ.van HeuvenV. J. (1993). Effects of time pressure on the phonetic realization of the Dutch accent-lending pitch rise and fall. Phonetica, 50, 161–171.
10.
DehéN. (2010). The nature and use of Icelandic pre-nuclear and nuclear pitch accents: Evidence from F0 alignment and syllable/segment duration. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 33(1), 31–65.
11.
EslamiM. (2000). The prosody of the Persian language and its application in computer-aided speech recognition [Doctoral thesis]. Tehran University.
12.
Estebas-VilaplanaE. (2000). The use and realization of accentual focus in Central Catalan [Doctoral dissertation]. University College, London.
13.
FaceT. (2002). When push comes to shove: Tonal crowding in Madrid Spanish. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 10, 77–100.
14.
FergusonC. (1957). Word stress in Persian. Language, 33, 123–135.
15.
GlasbergB.MooreB. (1990). Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data. Hearing Research, 47, 103–138.
16.
GrabeE.PostB.NolanF.FarrarK. (2000). Pitch accent realization in four varieties in British English. Journal of Phonetics, 28, 161–185.
17.
GriceM. (1995). The intonation of interrogation in Palermo Italian: Implications for intonation theory. Niemeyer, Tübingen.
18.
KahnemuyipourA. (2003). Syntactic categories and Persian stress. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(2), 333–379.
19.
KohlerK. J. (1983). F0 in speech timing. In Arbeitsber, Institute of Phonetics 20 (pp. 55–98). Kiel University.
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26.
22.
LaddD. R. (2003). Phonological conditioning of f0 target alignment. In SoléM. J.RecasensD.RomeroJ. (Eds.), Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 249–252). Barcelona.
23.
LaddD. R. (2008). Intonational phonology. Cambridge University Press.
24.
LaddD. R.FaulknerD.FaulknerH.SchepmanA. (1999). Constant “segmental anchoring” of F0 movements under changes in speech rate. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106, 1543–1554.
25.
LaddD. R.InekeM.SchepmanA. (2000). Phonological conditioning of peak alignment of rising pitch accents in Dutch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 2685–2696.
26.
PierrehumbertJ. B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation [Doctoral thesis]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
27.
PrietoP. (1998). The scaling of the L values in Spanish downstepping contours. Journal of Phonetics, 26, 261–282.
28.
PrietoP. (2005). Stability effects in tonal clash contexts in Catalan. Journal of Phonetics, 33, 215–242.
29.
PrietoP.Ortega-LlebaríaM. (2009). Do complex pitch gestures induce syllable lengthening in Catalan and Spanish? In VigárioM.FrotaS.FreitasM. J. (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology: Interactions and interrelations (pp. 51–70). John Benjamins.
30.
PrietoP.ShihC. (1995). Effects of tonal clash on down-stepped H* accents in Spanish. Proceedings of Eurospeech: Fourth European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, 2, 1307–1310.
31.
PrietoP.van SantenJ.HirschbergJ. (1995). Tonal alignment patterns in Spanish. Journal of Phonetics, 23, 429–451.
32.
RathckeT. (2009). A phonetic and phonological comparison between the intonational systems of German and Russian. Herbert Utz Verlag.
33.
Sadat TehraniN. (2007). The intonational grammar of Persian [Doctoral thesis]. University of Manitoba.
34.
Sadat TehraniN. (2009). The alignment of L + H* pitch accents in Persian intonation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 39, 205–230.
35.
SadeghiV. (2017). Word-level prominence in Persian: An experimental study. Language and Speech, 60(4), 571–596.
36.
SadeghiV. (2019). The timing of pre-nuclear pitch accents in Persian. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 49(3), 305–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100317000421
37.
SadeghiV. (2021). Intonation of questions in Persian. Journal of Language Related Research, 11(6), 575–603.
38.
SilvermanK.PierrehumbertJ. (1990). The timing of pre-nuclear high accents in English. In KingstonJ.BeckmanM. E. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology I. Between the grammar and physics of speech (pp. 72–106). Cambridge University Press.
39.
ThornberryP. (2014). Tonal Crowding Effects In Buenos Aires Spanish: An Experimental Study. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 7(2), 369–394. https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2014-1171
40.
XuY. (1998). Consistency of tone-syllable alignment across different syllable structures and speaking rates. Phonetica, 55, 179–203.
41.
YuanJ.ShihC.KochanskiG. P. (2002). Comparison of declarative and interrogative intonation in Chinese. In Proceedings of speech prosody (pp. 711–714). Universite de Provence Laboratoire Parole et Language.
