Acoustic correlates of information structure
Acoustic correlates of information structure
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/01690965.2010.504378
复制
发表时间：
2010-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gibson, Edward
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Breen, Mara;Fedorenko, Evelina;Gibson, Edward
本文报道了三项研究，旨在解决关于英语信息结构的声学相关性的三个问题：(1)说话者是否有韵律地标记信息结构，以及在多大程度上标记信息结构；(2)与信息结构不同方面相关的声学特征是什么；(3)听者从信号中获取信息的能力如何？主-动-宾句的信息结构是通过句前的问题来操纵的：目标句中的元素要么是被聚焦的（即对“wh”问题的回答），要么是被给定的（即先前话语中提到的）；此外，被聚焦的要素在语篇中有隐式或显式的对比集；最后，要么只聚焦对象（窄聚焦对象），要么聚焦整个事件（宽聚焦）。所有三个实验的结果都表明，人们可靠地标记(1)焦点位置（主语、动词或对象）使用更大的强度、更长的持续时间和更高的平均和最大F0，以及(2)焦点宽度，这样，与宽焦点相比，窄焦点被标记为更大的强度、更长的持续时间和更高的平均和最大F0。此外，当被试意识到不同信息结构中存在韵律歧义时，他们会可靠地标记焦点类型，从而产生比非对比聚焦元素强度更大、持续时间更长、平均F0和最大F0更低的对比聚焦元素。除了对语义和韵律的解释具有重要的理论结果外，这些实验还表明，线性残差化成功地消除了人们作品中的个体差异，从而揭示了跨说话者的概括。此外，判别建模使我们能够客观地确定含义差异背后的声学特征。
This paper reports three studies aimed at addressing three questions about the acoustic correlates of information structure in English: (1) do speakers mark information structure prosodically, and, to the extent they do; (2) what are the acoustic features associated with different aspects of information structure; and (3) how well can listeners retrieve this information from the signal? The information structure of subject-verb-object sentences was manipulated via the questions preceding those sentences: elements in the target sentences were either focused (i.e., the answer to a wh-question) or given (i.e., mentioned in prior discourse); furthermore, focused elements had either an implicit or an explicit contrast set in the discourse; finally, either only the object was focused (narrow object focus) or the entire event was focused (wide focus). The results across all three experiments demonstrated that people reliably mark (1) focus location (subject, verb, or object) using greater intensity, longer duration, and higher mean and maximum F0, and (2) focus breadth, such that narrow object focus is marked with greater intensity, longer duration, and higher mean and maximum F0 on the object than wide focus. Furthermore, when participants are made aware of prosodic ambiguity present across different information structures, they reliably mark focus type, so that contrastively focused elements are produced with greater intensity, longer duration, and lower mean and maximum F0 than noncontrastively focused elements. In addition to having important theoretical consequences for accounts of semantics and prosody, these experiments demonstrate that linear residualisation successfully removes individual differences in people's productions thereby revealing cross-speaker generalisations. Furthermore, discriminant modelling allows us to objectively determine the acoustic features that underlie meaning differences.