Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues

D. Van Lancker, G. J. Canter, D. Terbeek

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In a previous study, we demonstrated that listeners were highly successful in identifying the intended meaning of spoken ditropic sentences (those which may carry either a literal or an idiomatic meaning) when speakers were instructed to convey the distinction. The present communication reports on acoustic and phonetic analyses carried out with the goal of identifying cues that distinguished the literal and idiomatic utterances. Certain prosodic differences were observed. Literal utterances were systematically longer than idioms. This was partly due to increased use of pauses, as well as to increased duration of major lexical items. Moreover, literal sentences were typically characterized by greater numbers of pitch contours (discernible rise-fall excursions of fundamental frequency) and open junctures than were idiomatic utterances. In addition to suprasegmental contrasts, articulatory distinctions - corresponding to lento-allegro phonological rules - were also observed. These distinctions directly reflect the structural differences intrinsic to the 2 types of utterances. A literal sentence is formulated by the organization of constituent words and phrases. Idioms, on the other hand, are holistic units, largely nontransparent to syntactic structure or the usual meaning of the lexical members.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)330-335
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Speech and Hearing Research
Volume24
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1981

Fingerprint

Phonetics
phonetics
Acoustics
acoustics
Cues
listener
organization
communication
present
frovatriptan
Disambiguation
Utterance
Idiomatics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Van Lancker, D., Canter, G. J., & Terbeek, D. (1981). Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 24(3), 330-335.

Disambiguation of ditropic sentences : Acoustic and phonetic cues. / Van Lancker, D.; Canter, G. J.; Terbeek, D.

In: Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, 1981, p. 330-335.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Lancker, D, Canter, GJ & Terbeek, D 1981, 'Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues', Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 330-335.
Van Lancker, D. ; Canter, G. J. ; Terbeek, D. / Disambiguation of ditropic sentences : Acoustic and phonetic cues. In: Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1981 ; Vol. 24, No. 3. pp. 330-335.
@article{1a95810d132e47539bd474473fcca181,
title = "Disambiguation of ditropic sentences: Acoustic and phonetic cues",
abstract = "In a previous study, we demonstrated that listeners were highly successful in identifying the intended meaning of spoken ditropic sentences (those which may carry either a literal or an idiomatic meaning) when speakers were instructed to convey the distinction. The present communication reports on acoustic and phonetic analyses carried out with the goal of identifying cues that distinguished the literal and idiomatic utterances. Certain prosodic differences were observed. Literal utterances were systematically longer than idioms. This was partly due to increased use of pauses, as well as to increased duration of major lexical items. Moreover, literal sentences were typically characterized by greater numbers of pitch contours (discernible rise-fall excursions of fundamental frequency) and open junctures than were idiomatic utterances. In addition to suprasegmental contrasts, articulatory distinctions - corresponding to lento-allegro phonological rules - were also observed. These distinctions directly reflect the structural differences intrinsic to the 2 types of utterances. A literal sentence is formulated by the organization of constituent words and phrases. Idioms, on the other hand, are holistic units, largely nontransparent to syntactic structure or the usual meaning of the lexical members.",
author = "{Van Lancker}, D. and Canter, {G. J.} and D. Terbeek",
year = "1981",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "330--335",
journal = "Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research",
issn = "1092-4388",
publisher = "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disambiguation of ditropic sentences

T2 - Acoustic and phonetic cues

AU - Van Lancker, D.

AU - Canter, G. J.

AU - Terbeek, D.

PY - 1981

Y1 - 1981

N2 - In a previous study, we demonstrated that listeners were highly successful in identifying the intended meaning of spoken ditropic sentences (those which may carry either a literal or an idiomatic meaning) when speakers were instructed to convey the distinction. The present communication reports on acoustic and phonetic analyses carried out with the goal of identifying cues that distinguished the literal and idiomatic utterances. Certain prosodic differences were observed. Literal utterances were systematically longer than idioms. This was partly due to increased use of pauses, as well as to increased duration of major lexical items. Moreover, literal sentences were typically characterized by greater numbers of pitch contours (discernible rise-fall excursions of fundamental frequency) and open junctures than were idiomatic utterances. In addition to suprasegmental contrasts, articulatory distinctions - corresponding to lento-allegro phonological rules - were also observed. These distinctions directly reflect the structural differences intrinsic to the 2 types of utterances. A literal sentence is formulated by the organization of constituent words and phrases. Idioms, on the other hand, are holistic units, largely nontransparent to syntactic structure or the usual meaning of the lexical members.

AB - In a previous study, we demonstrated that listeners were highly successful in identifying the intended meaning of spoken ditropic sentences (those which may carry either a literal or an idiomatic meaning) when speakers were instructed to convey the distinction. The present communication reports on acoustic and phonetic analyses carried out with the goal of identifying cues that distinguished the literal and idiomatic utterances. Certain prosodic differences were observed. Literal utterances were systematically longer than idioms. This was partly due to increased use of pauses, as well as to increased duration of major lexical items. Moreover, literal sentences were typically characterized by greater numbers of pitch contours (discernible rise-fall excursions of fundamental frequency) and open junctures than were idiomatic utterances. In addition to suprasegmental contrasts, articulatory distinctions - corresponding to lento-allegro phonological rules - were also observed. These distinctions directly reflect the structural differences intrinsic to the 2 types of utterances. A literal sentence is formulated by the organization of constituent words and phrases. Idioms, on the other hand, are holistic units, largely nontransparent to syntactic structure or the usual meaning of the lexical members.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0019359992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0019359992&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7300273

AN - SCOPUS:0019359992

VL - 24

SP - 330

EP - 335

JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

SN - 1092-4388

IS - 3

ER -