Perception of Word-level Prominence in Free Word Order Language Discourse
Abstract
This study examines the contribution of constituent order, prosody, and information structure to the perception of word-level prominence in Russian, a free word order language. Prominence perception is investigated through the analysis of prominence ratings of nominal words in two published narrative texts. Word-level perceived prominence ratings were obtained from linguistically naïve native speakers of Russian in two tasks: a silent prominence rating task of the read text passages, and an auditory prominence rating task of the same texts as read aloud by a native Russian speaker. Analyses of the prominence ratings reveal a greater likelihood of perceived prominence for words introducing discourse-new referents, as well as words occurring in a non-canonical sentence position, and featuring acoustic-prosodic enhancement. The results show that prosody and word order vary probabilistically in relation to information structure in read-aloud narrative, suggesting a complex interaction of prosody, word order, and information structure underlying the perception of prominence.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Arnold J. E., Losongco A., Wasow T., Ginstrom R. (2000). Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76(1), 28–55.
Arvaniti A., Adamou E. (2010). Focus expression in Romani. In Proceedings of the 28th West Coast conference on formal linguistics (pp. 240–248). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Ashby J., Clifton Jr C. (2005). The prosodic property of lexical stress affects eye movements during silent reading. Cognition, 96(3), B89–B100.
Ashby J., Martin A. E. (2008). Prosodic phonological representations early in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(1), 224.
Ayers G. (1996). Nuclear accent types and prominence: Some psycholinguistics experiments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Aylett M., Turk A. (2004). The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 47(1), 31–56.
Baltazani M. (2003). Pragmatics, intonation, and word order in Greek. In Proceedings of Interfaces prosodiques IP 2003, 14–19.
Baltazani M., Jun S. A. (1999). Focus and topic intonation in Greek. In Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 2, 1305–1308.
Bard E. G., Aylett M.P. (1999). The dissociation of deaccenting, givenness and syntactic role in spontaneous speech. In Proceedings of ICPhS-99 (3) (pp. 1753–1756). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Bard E. G., Anderson A. H., Sotillo C., Aylett M., Doherty-Sneddon G., Newlands A. (2000). Controlling the intelligibility of referring expressions in dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(1), 1–22.
Barr D. J., Levy R., Scheepers C., Tily H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.
Baumann S. (2006). Information structure and prosody: Linguistic categories for spoken language annotation. In Sudhoff S., Lenertová D., Meyer R., Pappert S., Augurzky P., Mleinek I., . . . Schließer J. (Eds.), Methods in Empirical Prosody Research (pp. 153–180). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.
Baumann S., Riester A. (2012). Referential and lexical givenness: Semantic, prosodic and cognitive aspects. In Elordieta G., Prieto P. (Eds.), Prosody and Meaning (Trends in Linguistics) (pp. 119–162). Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter.
Baumann S., Riester A. (2013). Coreference, lexical givenness and prosody in German. Lingua, 136, 16–37.
Bishop J. (2012). Information structural expectations in the perception of prosodic prominence. In Elordieta G., Prieto P. (Eds.), Prosody and Meaning (Trends in Linguistics) (pp. 425–452). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bivon R. (1971). Element order. Studies in the Modern Russian Language, 7. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bock J. K., Warren R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47–67.
Boersma P., Weenink D. (2016). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.14. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
Bolinger D. (1986). Intonation and its parts: Melody in spoken English. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M. (2009). The role of prominence information in the real-time comprehension of transitive constructions: A cross-linguistic approach. Language and Linguistic Compass, 3(1), 19–58.
Botinis A., Themistocleous C., Kostopoulos Y., Nikolaenkova O. (2005). Syntactic and tonal correlates of focus in Greek and Russian. In Proceedings Fonetik 2005, the XVΙIIth Swedish Phonetics Conference, Goteborg, Sweden, 99–103.
Branigan H. P., Pickering M. J., Tanaka M. (2008). Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production. Lingua, 118(2), 172–189.
Breen M., Fedorenko E., Wagner M., Gibson E. (2010). Acoustic correlates of information structure. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 1044–1098.
Bryzgunova E. A. (1980). Intonacija. In Švedova N. J. (Ed.), Russkaja grammatika. Moskva: Tom 1. Nauka.
Bush L., Hess U., Wolford G. (1993). Transformations for within-subject designs: A Monte Carlo investigation. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 566–579.
Calhoun S. (2015). The interaction of prosody and syntax in Samoan focus marking. Lingua, 165, 205-229.
Chafe W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Li C. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 25–55). New York: Academic Press.
Chafe W. L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness and time. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Chodroff E., Cole J. (2018). Information structure, affect, and prenuclear prominence in American English. Proceedings of Interspeech 2018 (pp. 1848–1852), Hyderabad, India.
Chodroff E., Cole J. (2019). The phonological and phonetic encoding of information structure in American English nuclear accents. Proceedings of the International Congress on Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1570–1574), Melbourne, Australia.
Clark H. H., Haviland S. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contract. In Freedle R. O. (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 1–40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clifton C., Frazier L. (2004). Should given information come before new? Yes and no. Memory & Cognition, 32, 886–895.
Cole J., Hualde J. I., Smith C., Eager C., Mahrt T., Napoleão de, Souza R. (2019). Sound, structure and meaning: The bases of prominence ratings in English, French and Spanish. Journal of Phonetics, 75, 113–147.
Cole J., Mo Y., Hasegawa-Johnson M. (2010). Signal-based and expectation-based factors in the perception of prosodic prominence. Laboratory Phonology, 1, 425–452.
Cruttenden A. (2006). The deaccenting of given information: A cognitive universal? In Bernini G., Schwartz M. (Eds.), Pragmatic organization of discourse in the languages of Europe (pp. 311–356). Mouton de Gruyter, The Hague.
Cutler A., Dahan D., Van Donselaar W. (1997). Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech, 40(2), 141–201.
Daneš F. (Ed.). (2015). Papers on functional sentence perspective (Vol. 147). The Hauge: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Dilley L. (2005). The phonetics and phonology of tonal systems. PhD Dissertation, MIT.
Donati C., Nespor M. (2003) From focus to syntax. Lingua, 113(11), 1119–1142.
Ferreira F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 164–203.
Féry C. (2013). Focus as prosodic alignment. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 31(3), 683–734.
Féry C., Krifka M. (2008). Information structure: Notional distinctions, ways of expression. In van Sterkenburg P. (Ed.), Unity and diversity of languages (pp. 123–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Firbas J. (1992). Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Fisher C., Tokura H. (1995). The given/new contract in speech to infants. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(3), 287–310.
Fowler C. A., Housum J. (1987). Talkers’ signaling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language, 26(5), 489–504.
Fraundorf S. H., Watson D. G., Benjamin A. S. (2010). Recognition memory reveals just how CONTRASTIVE contrastive accenting really is. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(3), 367–386.
Fraundorf S. H., Watson D. G., Benjamin A. S. (2015). Reduction in prosodic prominence predicts speakers’ recall: Implications for theories of prosody. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 606–619. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2014.966122.
Genzel S., Ishihara B., Surányi B. (2015). The prosodic expression of focus, contrast and givenness: A production study of Hungarian. Lingua, 165, 183–204.
Givón T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In Givón T. (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study (pp. 1–41). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gordon P. C., Hendrick R., Johnson M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(6), 1411–1423.
Gow D. W., Melvold J., Manuel S. (1996). How word onsets drive lexical access and segmentation: Evidence from acoustics, phonology and processing. Proceedings of ICSLP (CD ROM). Philadelphia, USA.
Griffin Z. M., Crew C. (2010). Research in language production. In Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 409–425). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gundel J., Nancy H., Zacharski R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring Expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307.
Gussenhoven C. (2007). Types of focus in English. In Chungmin L., Gordon M., Büring D. (Eds.), Topic and focus: Cross-linguistic perspectives on meaning and intonation (pp. 83–100). Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.
Hanssen J., Peters J., Gussenhoven C. (2008). Prosodic effects of focus in Dutch declaratives. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2008, Campinas, Brazil, 609–612.
Heldner M. (2003). On the reliability of overall intensity and spectral emphasis as acoustic correlates of focal accents in Swedish. Journal of Phonetics, 31(1), 39–62.
Hermes D. J., Rump H. H. (1994). Perception of prominence in speech intonation induced by rising and falling pitch movements. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(1), 83–92.
Jackendoff R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jasinskaja K. (2013). Information structure in Slavic. In Féry C., Ishihara S. (Eds.), Handbook of information structure (pp. 709–732). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Katz J., Selkirk E. (2011). Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: evidence from phonetic prominence in English. Language, 87(4), 771–816.
Keating P., Cho T., Fougeron C., Hsu C. (1999). Domain-initial strengthening in four languages. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 97, 139–151.
Kochanski G., Grabe E., Coleman J., Rosner B. (2005). Loudness predicts prominence: Fundamental frequency lends little. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118(2), 1038–1054.
Krifka M. (2007). Basic notions of information structure. In Féry C., Krifka M. (Eds.). Interdisciplinary Studies of Information Structure, 6, Potsdam, Germany: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.
Krylova O., Khavronina S. (1988). Word order in Russian. Moscow, Russia: Russky Yazyk.
Lambrecht K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Levelt W. J. (1999). Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In Brown C. M., Hagoort P. (Eds.), The neurocognition of language (pp. 83–122). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Luchkina T., Cole J. (2016). Structural and referent-based effects on prosodic expression in Russian. Phonetica, 73(3–4), 279–313.
MacWhinney B., Bates E. (1978). Sentential devices for conveying givenness and newness. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(5), 539–558.
Makarova V. (2007). The effect of pitch peak alignment contrasts on sentence type identification in Russian. Language and Speech, 50(3), 385–422.
Marslen-Wilson W. D., Levy E., Tyler L. K. (1982). Producing interpretable discourse: The establishment and maintenance of reference. In Jarvella R. J., Klein W. (Eds.), Speech, Place, & Action (pp. 339–378). London: Wiley.
McKoon G., Ratcliff R., Ward G., Sproat R. (1993). Syntactic prominence effects on discourse processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(5), 593–607.
Meyer R., Mleinek I. (2006). How prosody signals force and focus—A study of pitch accents in Russian yes–no questions. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(10), 1615–1635.
Mitchell M. N. (2012). Interpreting and visualizing regression models using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
Miyamoto E. T., Takahashi S. (2004). Filler-gap dependencies in the processing of scrambling in Japanese. Language and Linguistics, 5(1), 153–166.
Morgan J. L., Meier R. P., Newport E. L. (1987). Structural packaging in the input to language learning: Contributions of prosodic and morphological marking of phrases to the acquisition of language. Cognitive Psychology, 19(4), 498–550.
Myers R. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications. Boston, MA: Duxbury Press.
Nakayama M. (1995). Scrambling and probe recognition. In Mazuka R., Nagai N. (Eds.), Japanese Sentence Processing (pp. 257–273). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Neeleman A., Reinhart T. (1998). Scrambling and the PF-interface. In Butt M., Geuder W. (Eds.), The projection of arguments (pp. 309–353). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
Neeleman A., Titov E. (2009). Focus, contrast, and stress in Russian. Linguistic Inquiry, 40(3), 514–524.
Patil U., Kentner G., Gollrad A., Kügler F., Féry C., Vasishth S. (2008). Focus, word order, and intonation in Hindi. Journal of South Asian Linguistics, 1(1), 53–70.
Patterson D. (2000). A linguistic approach to pitch range modeling. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
Pierrehumbert J., Hirschberg J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Cohen P., Morgan J., Pollack M. (Eds.), Intentions in communication (pp. 271–311). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Prince E. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given/new information. In Cole P. (Ed.), Radical Pragmatics (pp. 223–254). New York: Academic Press.
Raftery A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. In Marsden P. (Ed.). Sociological methodology (pp. 111–163). Washington, DC: The American Sociological Association.
Riester A., Piontek J. (2015). Anarchy in the NP: When new nouns get deaccented and given nouns don’t. Lingua, 165(B), 230–253.
Rietveld A. C. M., Gussenhoven C. (1985). On the relation between pitch excursion size and pitch prominence. Journal of Phonetics, 13, 299–308.
Savill N., Lindell A., Booth A., West G., Thierry G. (2011). Literate humans sound out words during silent reading. Neuroreport, 22(3), 116–120.
Sekerina I. A. (1999). The scrambling complexity hypothesis and processing of split scrambling constructions in Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 7(2), 218–265.
Sekerina I. (2003). Scrambling processing: Dependencies, complexity, and constraints. In Karimi S. (Ed.), Word order and scrambling (pp. 301–324). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Sekerina I. E., Trueswell J. C. (2012). Interactive processing of contrastive expressions by Russian children. First Language, 32(1/2): 63–87.
Sirotinina O. B. (1965/2003). Porjadok slov v russkom jazyke (“Word order in Russian”), 2nd edn. Moscow: Editorial URSS.
Sityaev D. (2000). The relationship between accentuation and information status of discourse referents: A corpus-based study. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 12, 285–304.
Skopeteas S., Fanselow G. (2008). Focus types and argument asymmetries: A cross-linguistic study in language production. In Carsten B. (Ed.), Contrastive information structure analysis (pp. 169–197). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Skopeteas S., Fanselow G. (2009). Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order language. In Zimmermann M., Féry C. (Eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives (pp. 307–331). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Skopeteas S., Fanselow G. (2010). Focus in Georgian and the expression of contrast. Lingua, 120(6), 1370–1391.
Skopeteas S., Féry C., Asatiani R. (2009). Word order and intonation in Georgian. Lingua, 119(1), 102–127.
Slioussar N. (2010). Russian data call for relational information structure notions. In Zybatow G., et al. (Eds.), Formal studies in Slavic linguistics: Proceedings of formal description of Slavic languages (7) (pp. 329–344). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Slioussar N. (2011a). Processing of a free word order language: The role of syntax and context. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 40(4), 291–306.
Slioussar N. (2011b). Grammar and information structure: A novel view based on Russian data. Ms. Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS and St. Petersburg State University. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from http://www.slioussar.ru/talks-papers.html
Sluijter A. M. C., van Heuven V. J. (1996). Acoustic correlates of linguistic stress and accent in Dutch and American English. In Proceedings of ICSLP ’ 96, 630–633.
Švedova N. Yu. (Ed.). (1982). Russkaja Grammatika. II ( Russian. Russian Grammar. II). The USSR Academy of Sciences. Moscow: Nauka.
Svetozavora N. (1998). Russian intonation. In Hirst D., Di Cristo A. (Eds.), Intonation systems: A survey of twenty languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Swerts M., Krahmer E. J., Avesani C. (2002). Prosodic marking of information status in Dutch and Italian: A comparative analysis. Journal of Phonetics, 30(4), 629–654.
Terken J., Hermes D. (2000). The perception of prosodic prominence. In Horne M. (Ed.), Prosody: Theory and experiment (pp. 89–127). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Titov E. (2012). Information structure of argument order alternations (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University College London.
Titov E. (2017). The canonical order of Russian objects. Linguistic Inquiry, 48(3), 427–457.
Traunmüller H., Eriksson A. (1995). The frequency range of the voice fundamental in the speech of male and female adults. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org
Turk A. E., Sawuch W. (1996). The processing of duration and intensity cues to prominence. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99(6), 3782–3790.
Vainio M., Järvikivi J. (2006). Tonal features, intensity, and word order in the perception of prominence. Journal of Phonetics, 34(3), 319–342.
Ward G., Birner B. (2004). Information structure and non-canonical syntax. In Horn L. R., Ward G. (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 153–174) Blackwell, Oxford.
Watson D. G. (2010). The many roads to prominence: Understanding emphasis in conversation. In Ross B. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 163–183). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Watson D., Arnold J. A., Tanenhaus M. K. (2008). Tic Tac TOE: Effects of predictability and importance on acoustic prominence in language production. Cognition, 106(3), 1548–1557.
Yokoyama O. (1986). Discourse and word order. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Xu Y., Xu C. (2005). Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation. Journal of Phonetics, 33(2), 159–197.
Cite
Cite
Cite
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: November 28, 2019
Issue published: June 2021
Keywords
PubMed: 31778096
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Publication usage*
Total views and downloads: 559
*Publication usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Publications citing this one
Receive email alerts when this publication is cited
Web of Science: 11 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 12
- Non-native (Czech and Russian L1) auditor assessments of some English suprasegmental features: Prominence and pitch accents
- Heritage Languages and Syntactic Theory
- Focus realization in Albanian: The role of prosody and utterance position
- Acquisition of non-contrastive focus in Russian by adult English-dominant bilinguals
- On Non-Native Listeners’ Ability to Identify Prominence and Pitch Accents in English Monologic Speech
- Unraveling the contributions of prosodic patterns and individual traits on cross-linguistic perception of Spanish sentence modality
- Non-Native (Czech and Russian L1) Auditor Assessments of Some English Suprasegmental Features: Prominence and Pitch Accents
- Contrastive focus is acquirable: An investigation of Russian contrastive focus with English/Russian bilinguals
- Why we need a gradient approach to word order
- Prosodic Prominence Across Languages
- View More
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
