On the basis of the acoustical analysis of Part I, it is hypothesized that native English speaker-hearers would use both F0 and duration (DR) as perceptual cues for the English NP—N distinction. Moreover, it is expected that the two variables would also be perceptually difficult for the Finnish informants. The results confirm the observations previously made of the tonal character of English stress (see, e.g., Cushing, 1969). The Finnish listeners almost completely rely upon DR. This reflects the absence of linguistic contrasts based on an active use of the larynx in Standard Finnish stress and intonation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bolinger, D. and Gerstman, L. ( 1957). Disjuncture as a cue to constructs. Word, 13, 246-255.
2.
Christie, W.M. ( 1974). Some cues for syllable juncture perception in English . Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 55, 819-821.
3.
Cushing, S. ( 1979) English as a tone language: The acoustics of primary stress . MIT Research Laboratory of Electronics Quarterly Progress Report, 92, 351-359.
4.
Fry, D.B. ( 1958). Experiments in the perception of stress. Language and Speech, 1, 126-152.
5.
Garding, E. ( 1971). Laryngeal boundary signals. Lund University Phonetics Laboratory, Working Papers, 4, 23-47.
6.
Klatt, D.L. ( 1976). Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 59, 1208-1221.
7.
Lehiste, I. ( 1960). An acoustic-phonetic study of internal open juncture . Phonetica, 5 (Supplement), 1-54.
8.
Lehiste, I., Olive, J.P. and Streeter, L.A. ( 1976). The role of duration in disambiguating syntactically ambiguous sentences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 60, 1199-1202.
9.
Liljencrantz, J.C.W. ( 1968). The OVE III speech synthesizer. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, AU-16, 137-140.
10.
Nakatani, L.H. and Dukes, K.D. ( 1977). Locus of segmental cues for word juncture. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 62, 714-719.
11.
Niemi, J. ( 1979). Noun and noun phrase stress: A phonetic study of English supplemented with an error analysis using Finnish speaker-hearers , I. Production. Language and Speech, 22, 221-235.
12.
Umeda, N. and Coker, C.H. ( 1975). Subphonemic details in American English. In G. Fant and M.A.A. Tatham (eds.), Auditory Analysis and Perception of Speech (London), pp. 539-563.
13.
Wiik, K. ( 1976). Suomen sananrajan fonetiikkaa. Paper presented at the 6th Conference of Finnish Phoneticians , Joensuu, April 24.
