In this study, we tested whether the perception of pitch contours within a lexical pitch accent can be better understood through tonal targets in the Autosegmental-Metrical (AM) model or as an entire tonal configuration identification. Specifically, a categorization experiment was conducted to see how South Kyungsang Korean (SKK) listeners perceive their high (H) and rising (LH) lexical pitch accents. Auditory stimuli were manipulated depending on H peak alignment (earlier vs. later), rise shape (domed or “convex” vs. scooped or “concave”), or segmental duration (shorter vs. longer). Results showed that F0 rise shape and segmental duration influenced SKK listeners’ categorization, while no effect of peak alignment was observed. Specifically, they responded to more scooped shapes as an LH, while more domed shapes were mainly assigned to H responses. Moreover, shorter duration induced a H categorization, while longer duration was related to an LH. Results suggest that SKK listeners use both F0 shape and segmental duration as important cues for tonal contrast, though F0 shape shows stronger categorical effect than duration. Thus, F0 shape information is important to determine phonological representation of lexical pitch accents, as opposed to strict tonal alignment defined in Autosegmental-Metrical theory.
AlbertA.CangemiF.EllisonT. M.GriceM. (2023). ProPer: PROsodic analysis with PERiodic energy [Computer software]. OSF. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/28EA5
3.
AmbrazaitisG.BruceG. (2006). Perception of South Swedish word accents. In AmbrazaitisG.SchötzS. (Eds.), Working papers, 52 (pp. 5–8). Centre for Languages and Literature, General Linguistics/Phonetics, Lund University.
4.
ArvanitiA. (2009). Intonational primitives: Companion to phonology. Wiley-Blackwell.
5.
ArvanitiA.LaddD. R. (2009). Greek wh-questions and the phonology of intonation. Phonology, 26(1), 43–74.
6.
ArvanitiA.LaddD. R.MennenI. (1998). Stability of tonal alignment: The case of Greek prenuclear accents. Journal of Phonetics, 26(1), 3–25.
7.
BarnesJ.BrugosA.VeilleuxN.Shattuck-HufnagelS. (2021). On (and off) ramps in intonational phonology: Rises, falls, and the Tonal Center of Gravity. Journal of Phonetics, 85, Article 101020.
8.
BarnesJ.VeilleuxN.BrugosA.Shattuck-HufnagelS. (2010). The effect of global contour shape on the perception of tonal timing contrasts in American English intonation. Speech Prosody, 2010, Article 100445.
9.
BarnesJ.VeilleuxN.BrugosA.Shattuck-HufnagelS. (2012). Tonal Center of Gravity: A global approach to tonal implementation in a level-based intonational phonology. Laboratory Phonology, 3(2), 337–383.
10.
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.
11.
BeckmanM. E.PierrehumbertJ. B. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology, 3, 255–309.
12.
BeckmanM. E.PierrehumbertJ. B. (1992). [Strategies and tactics for thinking about F0 variation.] Comments on chapters 13 and 14. In DochertyG. J.Robert LaddD. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology (Vol. 2, pp. 387–397). Cambridge University Press.
13.
BeckmanM. E.VendittiJ. J. (2011). Intonation. In GoldsmithJ.RiggleJ.YuA. C. L. (Eds.), The handbook of phonological theory (pp. 485–532). John Wiley & Sons.
14.
BlumsteinS. E.StevensK. N. (1981). Phonetic features and acoustic invariance in speech. Cognition, 10, 25–32.
ChangS. E. (2007). The phonetics and phonology of South Kyungsang Korean tones [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Texas at Austin.
20.
ChangS.-E. (2008a, January6). Tone alternations in South Kyungsang Korean [Conference session]. The 82nd Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Chicago, IL, United States.
21.
ChangS.-E. (2008b). The effect of weak tone on the F0 peak alignment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 124(4), 2498–2499.
22.
ChangS. E. (2013). Effects of fundamental frequency and duration variation on the perception of South Kyungsang Korean tones. Language and Speech, 56(2), 211–228.
23.
D’ImperioM. (2002). Italian intonation: An overview and some questions. Probus, 14, 37–69.
24.
D’ImperioM.HouseD. (1997). Perception of questions and statements in Neapolitan Italian. Eurospeech, 251–254.
25.
DelattreP. C.LibermanA. M.CooperF. S. (1955). Acoustic loci and transitional cues for consonants. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27(4), 769–773.
26.
D’ImperioM. (2000). The role of perception in defining tonal targets and their alignment [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ohio State University.
27.
D’ImperioM. (2001). Focus and tonal structure in Neapolitan Italian. Speech Communication, 33(4), 339–356.
28.
DoY.ItoC.KenstowiczM. (2014). Accent classes in South Kyengsang Korean: Lexical drift, novel words and loanwords. Lingua, 148, 147–182.
29.
DoY. A.KenstowiczM. (2010, June23–25). A note on phonological phrasing in South Kyungsang [Conference session]. Seoul International Conference on Linguistics (SICOL) 2010, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
30.
DorokhovaL.D’ImperioM. (2019, August). Rise dynamics determines tune perception in French: The case of questions and continuations [Conference session]. International Congress of Phonetic Science (ICPHS 2019), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
31.
FaceT. L. (2007). The role of intonational cues in the perception of declaratives and absolute interrogatives in Castilian Spanish. Journal of Experimental Phonetics, 16, 185–225.
32.
GilbertR. C.LiuC. (2013). Thresholds of tone pitch contour discrimination for English listeners. Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics, 19(1), Article 4799644.
33.
GriceM.BaumannS.BenzmüllerR. (2005). German intonation in autosegmental-metrical phonology. Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, 1, 55–83.
GussenhovenC. (2002). Phonology of intonation. Glot International, 6(9/10), 271–284.
36.
GussenhovenC.Van der VlietP. (1999). The phonology of tone and intonation in the Dutch dialect of Venlo. Journal of Linguistics, 35(1), 99–135.
37.
HirstD.Di CristoA. (1998). A survey of intonation systems. Intonation systems: A survey of twenty languages, 144, 152–166.
38.
HouseD.SvantessonJ. O. (1996). Tonal timing and vowel onset characteristics in Thai. In Proceedings of the Pan-Asiatic Linguistics 4th international symposium (pp. 104–113). http://sealang.net/sala/archives/pdf4/house1996tonal.pdf
39.
IskarousK.ColeJ.SteffmanJ. (2024). A minimal dynamical model of Intonation: Tone contrast, alignment, and scaling of American English pitch accents as emergent properties. Journal of Phonetics, 104, Article 101309.
JongmanA.QinZ.ZhangJ.SerenoJ. A. (2017). Just noticeable differences for pitch direction, height, and slope for Mandarin and English listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(2), EL163–EL169.
PeirceJ. W. (2009). Generating stimuli for neuroscience using PsychoPy. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 2(10), 1–8.
54.
PierrehumbertJ. (1981). Synthesizing intonation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 70(4), 985–995.
55.
PierrehumbertJ. B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
56.
PierrehumbertJ. B.HirshbergJ. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In CohenP. R.MorganJ.PollackM. E. (Eds.), Intentions in communication (pp. 271–311). MIT Press.
PitrelliJ. F.BeckmanM. E.HirschbergJ. (1994). Evaluation of prosodic transcription labeling reliability in the tobi framework. ICSLP, 1, 123–126.
59.
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
60.
SilvermanK.PierrehumbertJ. (1990). The timing of prenuclear high accents in English. In KingstonJ.BeckmanM. E. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology: Between the grammar and the physics of speech (pp. 71–106). Cambridge University Press.
61.
SpiveyM. (2007). The continuity of mind. Oxford University Press.
62.
StevensK. N. (1975). The potential role of property detectors in the perception of consonants. In FontG.ThathamM. A. A. (Eds.), Auditory analysis and perception of speech (pp. 303–330). Leningrad.
63.
StevensK. N. (1981). Evidence for the role of acoustic boundaries in the perception of speech sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69(S1), S116–S116.
64.
StevensK. N. (1989). On the quantal nature of speech. Journal of Phonetics, 17(1–2), 3–45.
65.
StevensK. N.BlumsteinS. E. (2013). The search for invariant acoustic correlates of phonetic features. In EimasP. D.MillerJ. L. (Eds.), Perspectives on the study of speech (pp. 1–38). Psychology Press.
66.
StevensK. N.KeyserS. J. (2010). Quantal theory, enhancement and overlap. Journal of Phonetics, 38(1), 10–19.
67.
t‘HartJ.CollierR.CohenA. (1990). A theory of intonation. In HartJ. T.CollierR.CohenA. (Eds.), A perceptual study of intonation: An experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody (pp. 68–120). Cambridge University Press.
68.
van den BergR.GussenhovenC.RietveldT. (1992). Downstep in Dutch: Implications for a model. In DochertyG. J.LaddR. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology II: Gesture, segment, prosody (pp. 335–358). Cambridge University Press.
69.
XuY. (1999). Effects of tone and focus on the formation and alignment of F0 contours. Journal of Phonetics, 27, 55–10.
