The present experiment investigates acoustic correlates of grammatical class in English. Results of previous studies examining the acoustic correlates of stress have established that variations in duration, amplitude and fundamental frequency are cues to lexical stress. The present study investigates whether systematic acoustic differences would also be observed in words which maintain a constant stress pattern across syntactic function. In the present experiment, five speakers were recorded producing 16 grammatically ambiguous lexical items such as answer or design. Stimuli were read either as a noun or a verb. Measurements for each stimulus consisted of a ratio of the first to the second syllable for the three acoustic parameters: duration, amplitude, and fundamental frequency. The data show slight but consistent acoustic differences in speakers' production of syntactically ambiguous words contingent upon their production as a noun or as a verb. Duration and amplitude cues appear to be the most robust cues for signaling these differences in grammatical function. These results are in accord with recent evidence documenting the paradigmatic stress pattern for grammatical class in English.
BECKMAN, M., (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Dordrecht: Foris.
2.
BECKMAN, M.E., & EDWARDS, J., (1994). Articulatory evidence for differentiating stress categories. In P.A. Keating (Ed.), Phonological structure and phonetic form: Papers in Laboratory Phonology III (pp. 7–34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BECKMAN, M.E. & PIERREHUMBERT, J., (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255–309.
4.
BLOOM, P., (1994). Possible names: The role of syntax-semantics mappings in the acquisition of nominals. Lingua, 92, 1–33.
5.
BOLINGER, D., (1958). A theory of pitch accent in English. Word, 14, 109–149.
6.
CHOMSKY, N. & HALLE, M., (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.
7.
CUTLER, A., (1991). Exploiting prosodic possibilities in speech segmentation. In G. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 105–122). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
CUTLER, A., & CLIFTON, C., (1984). The use of prosodic information in word recognition. In H. Bouma & D.G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 183–196). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
FRANCIS, W.N., & KUCERA, H., (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin Co.
10.
FRY, D.B., (1955). Duration and intensity as physical correlates of linguistic stress. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27, 765–768.
11.
FRY, D.B., (1958). Experiments in the perception of stress. Language and Speech, 1, 126–152.
12.
FRY, D.B., (1965). The dependence of stress judgments on vowel formant structure. In E. Zwirner & W. Bethge (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 306–311). Basel: Karger.
13.
GAY, T., (1978). Physiological and acoustic correlates of perceived stress. Language and Speech, 21, 347–353.
14.
GENTNER, D., (1978). On relational meaning: The acquisition of verb meaning. Child Development, 49, 988–998.
15.
GLEITMAN, L.R., (1990). The structural sources of word meaning. Language Acquisition, 1, 3–55.
16.
GREENBERG, J., (1978). Universals of human language. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
17.
HAYES, B., (1981). A metrical theory of stress rules. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
18.
HIRSH-PASEK, K., GLEITMAN, H., GLEITMAN, L.R., GOLINKOFF, R., & NAIGLES, L., (1988). Syntactic bootstrapping: Evidence from comprehension. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston.
19.
KAWAMOTO, A., FARRAR, W.T., & OVERBEEK, M., (1993). Effects of grammatical category and stress pattern on on-line processing of bisyllabic words. Unpublished manuscript.
20.
KELLY, M.H., (1988). Phonological biases in grammatical category shifts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 343–358.
21.
KELLY, M., (1992). Using sound to solve syntactic problems: The role of phonology in grammatical category assignments. Psychological Review, 99, 349–364.
22.
KELLY, M.H., & BOCK, J.K., (1988). Stress in time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 389–403.
23.
LEHISTE, I., (1970). Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
24.
LIBERMAN, M.Y., & PRINCE, A.S., (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 249–336.
25.
LIEBERMAN, P., (1960). Some acoustic correlates of word stress in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32, 451–454.
26.
LIEBERMAN, P., (1967). Intonation, perception, and language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
27.
LINDBLOM, B., (1963). Spectrographic study of vowel reduction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 35, 1773–1781.
28.
MORTON, J. & JASSEM, W., (1965). Acoustic correlates of stress. Language and Speech, 8, 159–181.
29.
NAIGLES, L., (1990). Children use syntax to learn verb meanings. Journal of Child Language, 17, 357–374.
30.
NAKATANI, L. & ASTON, C., (1978). Perceiving stress patterns of words in sentences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 63, S55.
31.
PIERREHUMBERT, J., (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
32.
QUIRK, R., GREENBAUM, S., LEECH, G., & SVARTVIK, J., (1986). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
33.
REETZ, H., (1989). A fast expert program for pitch extraction. Proceedings of Eurospeech: Paris 1959, 1, 476–479.
34.
SERENO, J.A., (1986). Stress pattern differentiation of form class in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 79, S36.
35.
SERENO, J.A. & JONGMAN, A., (1990). Phonological and form class relations in the lexiconJournal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 387–404.
36.
SERENO, J.A. & JONGMAN, A., (1993). Acoustic correlates of form class. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 8, 119–140.
37.
SHERMAN, D., (1975). Noun-verb stress alternation: An example of lexical diffusion of sound change in English. Linguistics, 159, 43–71.
38.
SOJA, N.N., (1992). Inferences about the meanings of nouns: The relationship between perception and syntax. Cognitive Development, 7, 29–45.
39.
SORENSEN, J., COOPER, W., & PACCIA, J., (1978). Speech timing of grammatical categories. Cognition, 6, 135–153.
40.
TREIMAN, R., (1989). The internal structure of the syllable. In G. Carlson & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 27–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
41.
Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary (1963). Springfield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Company.
