Reconciling two competing views on contrastiveness
نویسندگان
چکیده
Speakers may use pitch accents as pointers to new information, or as signals of a contrast relation between the accented item and a limited set of alternatives. Some people claim that contrastive accents are more emphatic than newness accents and have a different melodic shape. Others, however, maintain that contrastiveness can only be determined by looking at how accents are distributed in an utterance. In this paper it is argued that these two competing views can be reconciled by showing that they apply on different levels. To this end, accent patterns were obtained in a (semi-)spontaneous way via a dialogue game (Dutch) in which two participants had to describe coloured figures in consecutive turns. By varying the sequential order, target descriptions (“blue square”) were collected in four contexts: no contrast (all new), contrast in the adjective, contrast in the noun, all contrast. A distributional analysis revealed that both all new and all contrast situations correspond with double accents, whereas single accents on the adjective or the noun are used when these are contrastive. Single contrastive accents on the adjective are acoustically different from newness accents in the same syntactic position. The former have the shape of a ‘nuclear’ accent, whereas the newness accents on the adjective are ‘prenuclear’. Contrastive accents stand out as perceptually more prominent than newness accents. This difference in salience tends to disappear if the accented word is heard in isolation.
منابع مشابه
Reconciling Bayesian Epistemology and Narration-based Approaches to Judiciary Fact-finding
Legal probabilism (LP) claims the degrees of conviction in juridical fact-finding are to be modeled exactly the way degrees of beliefs are modeled in standard bayesian epistemology. Classical legal probabilism (CLP) adds that the conviction is justified if the credence in guilt given the evidence is above an appropriate guilt probability threshold. The views are challenged on various counts, es...
متن کاملSquaring the circle: a priority-setting method for evidence-based service development, reconciling research with multiple stakeholder views
BACKGROUND This study demonstrates a technique to aid the implementation of research findings through an example of improving services and self-management in longer-term depression. In common with other long-term conditions, policy in this field requires innovation to be undertaken in the context of a whole system of care, be cost-effective, evidence-based and to comply with national clinical g...
متن کاملReconciling Two Views of Cryptography
Two distinct, rigorous views of cryptography have developed over the years, in two mostly separate communities. One of the views relies on a simple but effective formal approach; the other, on a detailed computational model that considers issues of complexity and probability. There is an uncomfortable and interesting gap between these two approaches to cryptography. This paper starts to bridge ...
متن کاملOn the alleged existence of contrastive accents
Speakers may use pitch accents as pointers to new information, or as signals of a contrast relation between the accented item and a limited set of alternatives. There is no consensus in the literature whether a separately identi able contrastive accent exists. Some studies report that contrastive accents are more emphatic than newness accents and have a di erent melodic shape. In other studies,...
متن کاملReconciling Bayesian Epistemology and Narration-based Approaches to Judiciary Fact-finding
Legal probabilism (LP) claims the degrees of conviction in juridical fact-finding are to be modeled exactly the way degrees of beliefs are modeled in standard bayesian epistemology. Classical legal probabilism (CLP) adds that the conviction is justified if the credence in guilt given the evidence is above an appropriate guilt probability threshold. The views are challenged on various counts, es...
متن کامل