Analysis of Intonation: the Case of MAE_ToBI

Carlos Gussenhoven

doi:10.5334/labphon.30

Abstract

Annotation systems for intonation contours are ideally based on a well-motivated phonological analysis of the language in question, such that instances of indecision are restricted to uncertainties over what intonational structure the speaker has used, rather than over the choice of label in situations where no suitably distinctive label is available or more than one suitable label is available. This contribution inventorizes a number of cases of overanalysis and underanalysis in MAE_ToBI and argues that they are in large part due to the decision by Pierrehumbert (1980) to analyze a rising-falling accent as a rising pitch accent (L+H*) followed by a L-tone from a different source (an ‘on-ramp’ analysis). It is shown how the opposite choice, a falling pitch accent preceded by a L-tone from a different source (an ‘off-ramp’ analysis), avoids most of these problems. Results from a perception experiment testing MAE_ToBI’s prediction of intonational boundaries show that steep falls do not always signal a boundary. The inclusion of a tritonal prenuclear pitch accent, which explains the absence of an intonational boundary after a steep fall followed by a gradual rise, can readily be accommodated in the ‘off-ramp’ analysis, but not in MAE_ToBI.

Highlights

Faced with the need to identify the phonological elements in a single rising-falling accent peak in an otherwise low-pitched intonation contour, an analyst has three options, all of which have been adopted for West Germanic (Figure 1)
The above suggestion of a grammar which serves a group of closely related varieties of a language is not intended to blur the fact that we exclusively evaluated a phonological analysis of English, MAE_ToBI, and compared it with an alternative analysis
B. Otherwise, unspecified speech is governed by the leftmost tone

Summary

Introduction

Faced with the need to identify the phonological elements in a single rising-falling accent peak in an otherwise low-pitched intonation contour, an analyst has three options, all of which have been adopted for West Germanic (Figure 1). 20) does not make this equation when she lays out her indebtedness to Bruce (1977), it is plausible that, despite the difference in functionality of Bruce’s (1977) ‘sentence accent’ and the ‘phrasal accent’ of Pierrehumbert (1980), the combination of pitch accent and phrase accent was transferred to English nuclear melodies This led to boundary tones of an intermediate phrase (L- or H-) in the analysis of Mainstream American English (MAE) known as MAE_ToBI (Beckman & Pierrehumbert, 1986; Beckman et al, 2005; Silverman et al, 1992), whose development from Pierrehumbert (1980) is charted in Ladd This led to boundary tones of an intermediate phrase (L- or H-) in the analysis of Mainstream American English (MAE) known as MAE_ToBI (Beckman & Pierrehumbert, 1986; Beckman et al, 2005; Silverman et al, 1992), whose development from Pierrehumbert (1980) is charted in Ladd (2008, ch. 3)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion