Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published July 1984

The Distribution of Pitch Accents in Instructions as a Function of Discourse Structure

Abstract

Speakers gave instructions to listeners to assemble the front view of a house from a set of ready-made parts. The main aim was to find out how the distribution of accents over expressions referring to the parts of the front view was related to the structure of the monologues containing the instructions. Each monologue was analysed as a series of instructions, each instruction specifying to the listener what to do with one part of the front view (the TOPIC of the instruction). It turned out that the instruction was a meaningful unit of analysis: when topics were introduced into an instruction, the speaker always used accented expressions; afterwards the topic was often referred to by a pronoun. When the speaker mentioned other parts of the front view in the course of an instruction, he mostly used the names of the parts; most of these names were accented, though more often when they were used for the first time in an instruction than when they were used later on. The results were interpreted to mean that the speakers used accentuation to signal to the listener the degree of availability of the information conveyed: an accented expression signals to the listener that he cannot easily map the expression onto the information it refers to in the context; an unaccented expression signals to the listener that he can map the expression directly onto the intended information, since the information at that point in the utterance may be supposed to be maximally activated due to the preceding context. Some consequences were considered for the listener's processing of the incoming information.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

1 Some authors consider all uses of accent in context as indicative of contrast, where the actual referent is contrasted with the other ones possible at that moment, or the others the speaker is thinking of (Keijsper, 1982; Thorsen, 1980). If one prefers to look upon it in that way, the present investigation might be considered as focusing on the question of how context affects whether for the speaker a referent is the only one coming into view, or whether there are more, in the course of formulating what he will say. Of course, the question of how the context delimits the set of alternative candidates cannot be answered without taking into consideration the thematic structure of the discourse. Moreover, it is not clear what predictions may be derived from such a theoretical proposal regarding the influence of accentuation on the listener's comprehension.

References

Bock, J.K. and Irwin, D.E. ( 1980). Syntactic effects of information availability in sentence production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 467-484.
Bolinger, D. ( 1972). Accent is predictable (if you're a mind reader) . Language, 48, 633-644.
Bresnan, J. ( 1972). Stress and syntax: A reply. Language, 48, 326-342.
Chafe, W.L. ( 1974). Language and consciousness. Language, 50, 111-133.
Chomsky, N. ( 1971). Deep structure, surface structure, and semantic interpretation . In D.D. Steinberg and L.A. Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader in Philosophy, Linguistics and Psychology (Cambridge), pp. 183-216.
Clark, H.H. and Haviland, S.E. ( 1977). Comprehension and the Given-New Contract. In R.O. Freedle (ed.), Discourse Processes: Advances in Research and Theory: Vol. 1. Discourse Production and Comprehension (Norwood), pp. 1-40.
Collier, R. and 'T Hart, J. ( 1981). Cursus Nederlandse Intonatie (Leuven).
Cutler, A. ( 1976). Phoneme monitoring reaction time as a function of preceding intonation contour. Perception and Psychophysics, 20, 55-60.
Cutler, A. and Fodor, J.A. ( 1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition, 7, 49-59.
Ertel, S. ( 1977). Where do the sentences of subjects come from? In S.S. Rosenberg (ed.), Sentence Production: Developments in Research and Theory (Hillsgate), pp. 141-167.
Garcia, E. ( 1977). On the practical consequences of theoretical principles . Lingua, 43, 129-170.
Goodenough-Trepagnier, C. ( 1977). Etude psycholinguistique sur la focalisation, In R. Sarassin (ed.), Psycholinguistique expérimentale (Montréal), pp. 129-144.
Goodenough-Trepagnier, C. and Smith, F. ( 1977). Thematization and intonation in the organization of sentences . Language and Speech, 20, 99-107.
Grosz, B.J. ( 1978). Discourse knowledge. In D.E. Walker (ed.), Understanding Spoken Language (New York), pp. 227-344.
Halliday, M.A.K. ( 1967). Notes on contrastivity and theme II. Journal of Linguistics, 3, 199-244.
'T Hart, J. and Cohen, A. ( 1973). Intonation by rule: A perceptual quest. Journal of Phonetics, 1, 309-327.
'T Hart, J. and Collier, R. ( 1975). Integrating different levels of intonation analysis . Journal of Phonetics, 3, 235-255.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. ( 1981). The grammatical marking of thematic structure in the development of language production. In W. Deutsch (ed.), The Child's Construction of Language (London), pp. 121-147.
Keijsper, C.E. ( 1982). Over de relatie tussen context en accentuatie . Forum der Letteren, 23, 31-45.
Kirsner, R.S. ( 1979). Deixis in discourse: An exploratory quantitative study of the modern Dutch demonstrative adjectives. In T. Givón (ed), Syntax and Semantics: Vol. 12. Discourse and Syntax (New York), pp. 355-375.
Ladd, D.R. ( 1978). The Structure of Intonational Meaning (Bloomington) .
Lehiste, I. ( 1970). Suprasegmentals (Cambridge, Mass.).
Linde, C. ( 1977). Focus of attention and the choice of pronouns in discourse . Paper presented at the Symposium on Discourse and Syntax (University of California, Los Angeles).
Marslen Wilson, W., Levy, E. and Tyler, L.K. ( 1982). Producing interpretable discourse: The establishment and maintenance of reference. In R. Jarvella and W. Klein (eds.), Speech, Place, and Action (London), pp. 339-378.
Nooteboom, S.G. and Terken, J.M.B. ( 1982). What makes speakers omit pitch accents? An experiment . Phonetica, 39, 317-336.
Osgood, C.E. and Bock, K.J. ( 1977). Salience and sentencing. In S.S . Rosenberg (ed.), Sentence Production: Developments in Research and Theory (Hillsgate), pp. 81-140.
Pechmann, T. ( 1981). Children's assignment of acoustic stress in referential communication. In Papers and Reports on Child Language Development: Vol. 21 (Stanford University), pp. 100-107.
Reichman, R. ( 1978). Conversational coherency. Cognitive Science, 2, 283-327.
Schmerling, S.F. ( 1976). Aspects of English Sentence Stress (Austin).
O'Shaughnessy, D. ( 1976). Modelling fundamental frequency, and its relationships to syntax, semantics, and phonetics. Ph.D. dissertation Cambridge University.
Thorsen, N. ( 1980). Neutral stress, emphatic stress, and sentence intonation in advanced standard Copenhagen Danish. Annual Report of the Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen, 14,121-205.