Phonetica was published by Karger Publishers up to and including 2020. If you or your institution subscribed to Phonetica during that period, you might still have access to the full text of this article on the Karger platform if you cannot access it here.
Abstract
This article reports an experiment to test whether Japanese and English speakers vary their fundamental frequency (f0) range as a function of the language spoken. Speech samples of Japanese-(American) English simultaneous bilinguals (5 males, 5 females; all undergraduates at UC Berkeley) performing comparable reading tasks in their two native languages were analysed. The study builds on a relatively new approach to measuring f0 range that computes its high and low points from tonal targets in the intonational phonology. Unlike in most previous studies where f0 range is traditionally treated as a one-dimensional measure, f0 range in this study is measured along two quasi-independent dimensions: level and span. Findings revealed statistically significant crosslanguage differences between Japanese and English in both dimensions. This provides new insights into the relation between prosodic structure and f0 range in these two typologically different prosodic systems.
verified
References
1 Alte nberg E, Ferrand C (2006): Fundamental frequency in monolingual English, bilingual English-Russian, and bilingual English-Cantonese young adult women. J Voice 20:88-96.Search in Google Scholar
2 Anderson J, Cooper W (1986): Fundamental frequency during spontaneous picture description. J Acoust Soc Am 19:1172-1174.10.1121/1.393391Search in Google Scholar
3 Asu E (2003): The Phonetics and Phonology of Estonian Intonation; PhD diss University of Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
4 Barkat M, Ohala J, Pellegrino F (1999): Prosody as a distinctive feature for the discrimination of Arabic dialects. Proc Eurospeech, pp 395-398.10.21437/Eurospeech.1999-102Search in Google Scholar
5 Bartels C (1999): The Intonation of English Statements and Questions. London, Garland.Search in Google Scholar
6 Beckman M (1986): Stress and Non-Stress Accent. Netherlands Phonetics Archives. Dordrecht, Foris, vol 7.10.1515/9783110874020Search in Google Scholar
7 Beckman M (1996): The parsing of prosody. Lang Cognit Processes 11:17-68.10.1080/016909696387213Search in Google Scholar
8 Beckman M, Ayers-Elam G (1997): Guidelines for ToBI labeling; version 3.0, March 1997, manuscript. Ohio State University Research Foundation.Search in Google Scholar
9 Beckman M, Hirschberg J (1992): The ToBI annotation conventions; manuscript. Ohio State University.Beckman M, Pierrehumbert J (1986): Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonol Yearb. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, vol 3, pp 255-309.Search in Google Scholar
10 Bishop J (2013): Prenuclear Accentuation in English: Phonetics, Phonology, Information Structure; PhD diss University of California, Los Angeles.Search in Google Scholar
11 Bishop J, Keating P (2012): Perception of pitch location within a speaker's range: fundamental frequency, voice quality and speaker sex. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1100-1112.10.1121/1.4714351Search in Google Scholar
12 Boersma P, Weenink D (2012): Praat: doing phonetics by computer, version 5.3.35. http://www.praat.org/.Search in Google Scholar
13 Bush C (1967): Some acoustic parameters of speech and their relationship to the perception of dialect differences. TESOL Q 1:20-30.10.2307/3586196Search in Google Scholar
14 Chen G (1972): A Comparative Study of Pitch Range of Native Speakers of Midwestern English and Mandarin Chinese: An Acoustic Study; PhD diss University of Wisconsin-Madison.Search in Google Scholar
15 Chen S (2005): The effects of tones on speaking fundamental frequency and intensity ranges in Mandarin and Min dialects. J Acoust Soc Am 117:3225-3230.10.1121/1.1872312Search in Google Scholar
16 Connell B, Ladd D (1990): Aspects of pitch realisation in Yoruba. Phonology 7:1-29.10.1017/S095267570000110XSearch in Google Scholar
17 Cosmides L (1983): Invariances in the acoustic expression of emotion in speech. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perf 9:864-881.10.1037/0096-1523.9.6.864Search in Google Scholar
18 Cutler A, Otake T (1999): Pitch accent in spoken-word recognition in Japanese. J Acoust Soc Am 105:1877-1888.10.1121/1.426724Search in Google Scholar
19 de Leeuw E, Mennen I, Scobbie J (2012): Singing a different tune in your native language: first language attrition of prosody. Int J Bilingualism 16:101-116.10.1177/1367006911405576Search in Google Scholar
20 Deutsch D, Jinghong L, Sheng J, Henthorn T (2009): The pitch levels of female speech in two Chinese villages. J Acoust Soc Am 125:208-213.10.1121/1.3113892Search in Google Scholar
21 Dolson M (1994): The pitch of speech as a function of linguistic community. Music Percept 11:321-331.10.2307/40285626Search in Google Scholar
22 Flege J (1987): The production of ‘new' and ‘similar' phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. J Phon 15:47-65.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30537-6Search in Google Scholar
23 Flege J, Eefting W (1987): Cross-language switching in stop consonant production and perception by Dutch speakers of English. Speech Commun 6:185-202.10.1016/0167-6393(87)90025-2Search in Google Scholar
24 Grabe E, Post B, Nolan F (2001): Modelling intonational variation in English: the IViE system; in Puppel, Demenko (eds): Proceedings of Prosody 2000. Poznan, Adam Mickiewicz University. Grabe E, Post B, Nolan F, Farrar K (2000): Pitch accent realisation in four varieties of British English. J Phon 28:161-185.Search in Google Scholar
25 Graham C (2014): The Phonetics and Phonology of Late Bilingual Prosodic Acquisition: A Cross-Linguistic Investigation; PhD diss University of Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
26 Hanley D, Snidecor J (1967): Some acoustic similarities among languages. Phonetica 17:141-148.10.1159/000258584Search in Google Scholar
27 Hanley T, Snidecor J, Ringel R (1966): Some acoustic differences among languages. Phonetica 14:97-107.10.1159/000258520Search in Google Scholar
28 Honorof D, Whalen D (2010): Perception of pitch location within a speaker's F0 range. J Acoust Soc Am 117:2193-2200.10.1121/1.1841751Search in Google Scholar
29 Horii Y (1975): Some statistical characteristics of voice fundamental frequency. J Speech Hear Res 18:192-101.10.1044/jshr.1801.192Search in Google Scholar
30 Huang Y, Fon J (2011): Investigating the effect of Min on dialectal variations of Mandarin tonal realization. Proc 17th ICPhS, Hong Kong, pp 918-921.Search in Google Scholar
31 Jassem W (1971): Pitch and compass of the speaking voice. J Int Phon Assoc 1:59-68.10.1017/S0025100300000256Search in Google Scholar
32 Keating P, Kuo G (2012): Comparison of speaking fundamental frequency in English and Mandarin. J Acoust Soc Am 132:1050-1060.10.1121/1.4730893Search in Google Scholar
33 Komatsu M (2007): Reviewing human language identification; in Müller, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Springer, vol 4441, pp 206-228.Search in Google Scholar
34 Komatsu M, Mori K, Arai T, Aoyagi M, Muhahara Y (2002): Human language identification with reduced segmental information. Acoust Sci Technol 23:143-153.10.1250/ast.23.143Search in Google Scholar
35 Ladd D (2008): Intonational Phonology (1996), ed 2. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
36 Ladd D, Terken J (1995): Modeling intra- and inter-speaker pitch range variation; in Elenius, Branderud (eds): Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Stockholm, vol 2, pp 386-389.Search in Google Scholar
37 Lehiste I (1970): Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
38 Liberman M, Pierrehumbert J (1984): Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length; in Aronoff, Oehrle (eds): Language Sound Structure. Cambridge, MIT Press, pp 157-233.Search in Google Scholar
39 Loveday L (1981): Pitch, politeness and sexual role: an exploratory investigation into the pitch correlates of English and Japanese politeness formulae. Lang Speech 24:71-89.10.1177/002383098102400105Search in Google Scholar
40 Maidment J (1976): Voice fundamental frequency characteristics as language differentiators. Work in Progress. London, Speech and Hearing, University College, vol 2, pp 74-93.Search in Google Scholar
41 Maidment J (1983): Language recognition and prosody: further evidence. Speech Hear Lang 1:133-141.Search in Google Scholar
42 Major R (1992): Losing English as a first language. Modern Lang J 76:190-208.10.1111/j.1540-4781.1992.tb01100.xSearch in Google Scholar
43 Mehler J, Jusczyk P, Lambertz G, Halsted N, Bertoncini J, Amiel-Tison C (1988): A precursor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition 29:143-178.10.1016/0010-0277(88)90035-2Search in Google Scholar
44 Menn L, Boyce S (1982): Fundamental frequency and discourse structure. Lang Speech 25:341-383.10.1177/002383098202500403Search in Google Scholar
45 Mennen I, Schaeffler F, Dickie C (2014): Second language acquisition of pitch range in German learners of English. Stud Second Lang Res 36:303-329.10.1017/S0272263114000023Search in Google Scholar
46 Mennen I, Schaeffler F, Docherty G (2008): A methodological study into the linguistic dimensions of pitch range differences between German and English. Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Speech Prosody, Campinas.Search in Google Scholar
47 Mennen I, Schaeffler F, Docherty G (2012): Cross-language differences in fundamental frequency range: a comparison of English and German. J Acoust Soc Am 131:2249-2260.10.1121/1.3681950Search in Google Scholar
48 Moftah A, Roach P (1988): Language recognition from distorted speech: comparison of techniques. J Int Phon Assoc 18:50-52.10.1017/S0025100300003558Search in Google Scholar
49 Moon C, Cooper R, Fifer W (1993): Two-day olds prefer their native language. Infant Behav Dev 16:495-500.10.1016/0163-6383(93)80007-USearch in Google Scholar
50 Navrátil J (2001): Spoken language recognition: a step toward multilinguality in speech processing. IEEE Trans Speech Audio Processing 9:678-685.10.1109/89.943345Search in Google Scholar
51 Nazzi T, Bertoncini J, Mehler J (1998): Language discrimination by newborns: towards an understanding of the role of rhythm. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:756-766.10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.756Search in Google Scholar
52 Ohala J, Gilbert J (1979): Listeners' ability to identify languages by their prosody; in Léon, Rossi (eds): Problèmes de Prosodie. Ottawa, Didier, pp 123-131.Search in Google Scholar
53 Ohara Y (1992): Gender-dependent pitch levels: a comparative study in Japanese and English; in Hall K, Bucholtz M, Moonwoman B (eds): Locating Power: Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference. Berkeley, Berkeley Women and Language Group, pp 469-477.Search in Google Scholar
54 Ohara Y (1999): Performing gender through voice pitch: a cross-cultural analysis of Japanese and American English; in Pasero, Braun (eds): Performing and Perceiving Gender. Opladen, Westdeutscher Verlag, pp 105-116.Search in Google Scholar
55 Patterson D (2000): A Linguistic Approach to Pitch Modeling; PhD diss Edinburgh University.Search in Google Scholar
56 Pierrehumbert J (1980): The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation; PhD diss MIT, Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
57 Pierrehumbert J, Beckman M (1988): Japanese Tone Structure. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs. Cambridge, MIT Press, No 15.Search in Google Scholar
58 Prieto P (2004): The search for phonological targets in the tonal space: evidence from five sentence types in Peninsular Spanish; in Face (ed): Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology. The Hague, Mouton de Gruyter, pp 29-59.Search in Google Scholar
59 Quirk R, Greenbaum S, Leech G, Svartvik J (1987): A Grammar of Contemporary English. Harlow, Longman.Search in Google Scholar
60 Rando E (1980): Intonation in discourse; in Waugh L, van Schooneveld C (eds): The Melody of Language. Baltimore, University Park Press, pp 243-278.Search in Google Scholar
61 Richardson J (1973): The Identification by Voice of Speakers Belonging to Two Ethnic Groups; PhD diss Ohio State University.Search in Google Scholar
62 Scharff-Rethfeldt W, Miller N, Mennen I (2008): Unterschiede in der mittleren Sprechtonhöhe bei Deutsch/Englisch bilingualen Sprechern (Speaking Fundamental Frequency Differences in Highly Proficient German-English Bilinguals). Sprache Stimme Gehör 32:123-128.10.1055/s-0028-1083799Search in Google Scholar
63 Schubiger M (1958): English Intonation. Tübingen, Niemeyer.Search in Google Scholar
64 Silverman K, Beckman M, Pitrelli J, Ostendorf M, Wightman C, Price P, Pierrehumbert J, Hirschberg J (1992): ToBI: a standard for labeling English prosody. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), Alberta, pp 867-870.10.21437/ICSLP.1992-260Search in Google Scholar
65 Spitzer R, Fleiss J (1974): A reanalysis of the reliability of psychiatric diagnosis. Am J Psychiatry 125:341-347.10.1192/bjp.125.4.341Search in Google Scholar
66 Todaka Y (1990): An Error Analysis of Japanese Students' Intonation and Its Prosodic Analysis; MA thesis University of California, Los Angeles.Search in Google Scholar
67 Torgerson R (2005): A Comparison of Beijing and Taiwan Mandarin Tone Register: An Acoustic Analysis of Three Native Speech Styles; MA thesis Brigham Young University.Search in Google Scholar
68 van Bezooijen R (1995): Sociocultural aspects of pitch differences between Japanese and Dutch women. Lang Speech 38:253-265.10.1177/002383099503800303Search in Google Scholar
69 Venditti J (1995): Japanese ToBI Labelling Guidelines. Ohio State Univ Working Pap Linguist 50:127-162.Search in Google Scholar
70 Venditti J (2005): The JToBI model of Japanese intonation; in Jun (ed): Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp 172-200.Search in Google Scholar
71 Vicenik C, Sundara M (2013): The role of intonation in language and dialect discrimination by adults. J Phon 41:297-306.10.1016/j.wocn.2013.03.003Search in Google Scholar
72 Xu Y, Xu C (2005): Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation. J Phon 33:159-197.10.1016/j.wocn.2004.11.001Search in Google Scholar
73 Yamazawa H, Hollien H (1992): Speaking fundamental frequency pattern of Japanese women. Phonetica 49:128- 140.10.1159/000261907Search in Google Scholar
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel
