See current and past issues in our e-shop
Enter e-shop
>ČASOPIS PRO MODERNÍ FILOLOGII 2021 (103) 1
Phonetic Reductions in Insubordinate Structures Expressing Evidentiality
ABSTRACT (en)
The study tests the hypothesis that phonetic reductions in spontaneous interaction contribute interpretive clues which aid in assigning different meanings to an ostensibly single grammatical pattern. We focus on two variants of insubordinate clauses introduced by jestli ‘if/whether’, each associated with a specific evidential meaning, as attested in the corpus of conversational Czech (Ortofon): a speaker’s uncertainty about the truth of a given proposition vs. a speaker’s certainty that the proposition is invalid. Using phonetic feature analysis of the relevant words (jestli; nevím), we establish the degree of reduction by combining a word reduction rate with the number of segments and syllables that are actually pronounced. The analysis reflects a relationship between the degree of reduction and the functional split: highly reduced instances signal the interpretation of a speaker’s uncertainty, while low reductions signal negative certainty. These findings also suggest broader methodological and theoretical consequences, including the issue of adequate, multi-layered representational models of spontaneously produced language.
KEYWORDS (cz)
fonetické redukce, míra slovní redukce, fonetické rysy, jistotní postoje, insubordinace
KEYWORDS (en)
phonetic reductions, word reduction rate, phonetic features, evidentiality, insubordination
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14712/23366591.2021.1.1
REFERENCES
Beijering, K. — Kaltenböck, G. — Sansiñena, M. S. (2019): Insubordination: central issues and open questions. In: K. Beijering — G. Kaltenböck — M. S. Sansiñena (eds.), Insubordination: theoretical and empirical issues. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, s. 1–28.
Benavides-Varela, S. — Mehler, J. (2014): Verbal positional memory in 7-month-olds. Child Development, 86, 1, s. 209–223.
Bybee, J. L. (1985): Morphology. A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J. (2003): Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. (2007): Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford — New York: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, J. — Scheibman, J. (1999): The effect of usage on degrees of constituency: The reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics, 37, 4, s. 575–596.
Boersma, P. — Weenink, D. J. M. (2019): Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 6.1.08). Staženo 5. 12. 2019, http://www.praat.org.
Browman, C. P. — Goldstein, L. M. (1992): Articulatory phonology: An overview. Phonetica, 49, s. 155–180.
Cangemi, F. — Niebuhr, O. (2018): Rethinking reduction and canonical forms. In: F. Cangemi — M. Clayards — O. Niebuhr — B. Schuppler — M. Zeller (eds.), Rethinking reduction. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, s. 277–302.
Clements, G. N. (2009) Does Sonority Have a Phonetic Basis? In: Raimy, E. — Ch. Cairns (eds.), Contemporary Views on Architecture and Representations in Phonological Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, s. 165–176.
Dalby, J. (1986): Phonetic structure of fast speech in American English. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
ELAN (Version 5.8) [Computer software]. (2019). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Language Archive. Staženo z https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan
Ernestus, M. — Baayen, H. — Schreuder, R. (2002): The recognition of reduced word forms. Brain and Language, 81, s. 162–173.
Evans, N. (2007): Insubordination and its uses. In: I. Nikolaeva (ed.), Finiteness: theoretical and empirical foundations. Oxford: OUP, s. 366–431.
Evans, N. — Watanabe, H. (eds.) (2016): Insubordination. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fried, M. (2009): Construction Grammar as a tool for diachronic analysis. Constructions and Frames, 1, 2, s. 261–290.
Fried, M. (2010): Constructions and frames as interpretive clues. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 24, Frames: from grammar to application, ed. by P. Sambre and C. Wermuth, s. 83–102.
Fried, M. — Machač, P. (in prep.): Intonation as a cue to evidential inferences in one type of insubordinate clauses.
Fried, M. — Östman, J-O. (2005): Construction Grammar and spoken language: the case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 11, s. 1752–1778.
Gahl, S. — Strand, J. F. (2016): Many neighborhoods: Phonological and perceptual neighborhood density in lexical production and perception. Journal of Memory and Language, 89, s. 162–178.
Greenberg, S. (1999): Speaking in short hand — A syllable-centric perspective for understanding pronunciation variation. Speech Communication, 29, s. 159–176.
Hanique, I. — Ernestus, M. (2012): The role of morphology in acoustic reduction. Ligngue e linguaggio, 2, s. 147–164.
Johnson, K. (2004): Massive reduction in conversational American English. In: K. Yoneyama — K. Maekawa (eds.), Spontaneous speech: Data and analysis. Proceedings of the 1st Session of the 10th International Symposium. Tokyo: The National International Institute for Japanese Language, s. 29–54.
Keune, K. — Ernestus, M. — Van Hout, R. — Baayen, R. H. (2005): Social, geographical, and register variation in Dutch: From written MOGELIJK to spoken MOK. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1, s. 183–223.
Kohler, K. J. (1999): Articulatory prosodies in German reduced speech. In: J. J. Ohala — Y. Hasegawa — M. Ohala — D. Granville — A.C. Bailey (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, vol. 1, San Francisco, s. 89–92.
Kopřivová, M. — Waclawičová, M.: ORAL2006 (2006): Korpus neformální mluvené češtiny. Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK. http://www.korpus.cz
Kopřivová, M. — Komrsková, Z. — Lukeš, D. — Poukarová, P. — Škarpová, M. (2017): ORTOFON: Korpus neformální mluvené češtiny s víceúrovňovým přepisem. Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK.
Laver, J. (1994): Principles of phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lindblom, B. (1990): Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H–H Theory. In: W. J. Hardcastle — A. Marchal (eds.), Speech production and speech modelling. Springer, Dordrecht, s. 403–439.
Machač, P. — Fried, M. (2019): Na pomezí syntaxe a zvuku ve spontánní řeči: předběžná zjištění. Příspěvek přednesený na 1. konferenci České asociace kognitivní lingvistiky (CALC-1), Praha.
Machač, P. — Fried, M. (in prep.): Utterance comprehension in spontaneous speech: phonetic reductions and syntactic context.
Machač, P. — Lukeš, D. (2017): Parallel articulation as a mechanism of emergence of new phonemes. 4th International Workshop on Sound Change, Edinburgh, 20. 4. 2017.
Machač P. — Skarnitzl R. (2009): Principles of Phonetic Segmentation. Praha: Nakladatelství Epocha.
Machač, P. — Zíková, M. (2015): Parallel articulation: The phonetic base and the phonological potentiality. Slovo a slovesnost, 76, 1, s. 3–21.
Machač, P. — Zíková, M. (2013): Redukční procesy v řeči z hlediska fonetických rysů. In: Uličný, O. — Prošek, M. (eds.) Studie k moderní mluvnici češtiny 5, K české fonetice a pravopisu. Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, s. 17–44.
Mertens, Piet (2004): The prosogram: Semiautomatic transcription of prosody based on a tonal perception model. In: B. Bel — I. Marlien (eds.), Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2004, Nara (Japan), 23.–26. 3. 2004.
Niebuhr, O. — Kohler, K. J. (2011): Perception of phonetic detail in the identification of highly reduced words. Journal of Phonetics, 39, s. 319–329.
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003): Probabilistic phonology: Discrimination and robustness. In: R. Bod — J. Hay — S. Jannedy (eds.), Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, s. 177–228.
Schuppler, B. — Ernestus, M. — Scharenborg, O. — Boves, L. (2011): Acoustic reduction in conversational Dutch: A quantitative analysis based on automatically generated segmental transcriptions. Journal of Phonetics, 39, s. 96–109.
Shockey, L. (2003): Sound patterns of spoken English. Oxford: Blackwell.
Skarnitzl, R. — Volín, J. (2005). Czech Voiced Labiodental Continuant Discrimination from Basic Acoustic Data. In: Proceedings of Interspeech 2005, the 9th Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, s. 2921–2924. Lisabon: ISCA.
Sundara, M. (2017): Why do children pay more attention to grammatical morphemes at the ends of sentences? Journal of Child Language, 45, 3, s. 703–716.
Waclawičová, M. — Kopřivová, M. — Křen, M. — Válková, L. (2008): ORAL2008: sociolingvisticky vyvážený korpus neformální mluvené češtiny. Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK. http://www.korpus.cz
Zíková, M. — Machač, P. (2014): Variability in phonetic realization of the demonstrative ten in terms of its informational relevance in the sentence. In: Veselovská L. — Janebová, M. (eds.), Nominal structures: All in complex DPs. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého, s. 98–109.
