BeckmanMary E.ElamGayle Ayers. 1993. Guidelines for ToBI labeling. Vol. 3. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Research Foundation.
2.
GoodenShelome. 2009. Authentically Black, bone fide Pittsburgher. A first look at intonation in African American women’s speech in Pittsburgh. In LanehartSonja (ed.), African American women’s language: Discourse, education and identity, 142-164. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
LohfinkGeorgKatsikaArgyroArvanitiAmalia. 2019. Variability and category overlap in the realization of intonation. In SashaCalhounEscuderoPaolaTabainMarijaWarrenPaul (eds.), Proceedings of the 19th international congress of phonetic sciences, Melbourne, Australia 2019, 701-705. Canberra: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association Inc.
5.
HollidayNicole. 2016. Intonational variation, linguistic style, and the Black/Biracial experience. New York, NY: New York University PhD dissertation.
6.
HollidayNicoleMcLartyJason. 2018. Sociolinguistic approaches to prosody and AAL: Findings, implications, and future directions. Paper presented at Experimental and theoretical approaches to prosody (ETAP) 4, University of MassachusettsAmherst, MA.
7.
McLemoreCynthia Ann. 1991. The pragmatic interpretation of English intonation: Sorority speech. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin PhD dissertation.
8.
PodesvaRobert. 2011. Salience and social meaning in declarative contours: Three case studies of gay professionals. Journal of English Linguistics39(3). 233-264.
9.
WardNigel G.GallardoPaola. 2015. A corpus for investigating English language learners’ dialog behaviors. UTEP-CS-15-33. University of Texas at El Paso, Department of Computer Science.
10.
WardNigel G.WernerSteven D.2013. Data collection for the similar segments in social speech task. UTEP-CS-13-58. University of Texas at El Paso.
