h%, l% and everything between

NWAV 37

11/09/2008

H%, L% and Everything BetweenPhonetic and Phonological Variation in Mandarin Intonation

Patrick CallierGeorgetown UniversityDepartment of Linguistics

Patrick [email protected]/9/2008

H%

2

Intonation and Social Meaning

• Universal interpretations• Bolinger (1989), Cruttenden (1995)

• Social meanings• McConnell-Ginet (1983), Warren and Britain

(2000), Cheng and Warren (2005), McLemore (1991)


H%

3

Intonation and Social Meaning

• Rising declaratives in English• Britain (1992), Cruttenden (1995), Lowry

(2002), Grabe (2004), Cheng and Warren (2005)

• Rises in other languages• Queen (2006)


H%

4

Intonation in Mandarin

• Phonetic investigations• Shen (1990): higher pitch register in yes/no-

questions• Autosegmental analyses (Peng et al.

2006)• series of “pitch targets”

• sentence-level intonation and lexical tone interfere

• The description of Mandarin intonation: M-ToBI• Phrase-initial tones control pitch range and

register– e.g. %e-prom, for expanded pitch range in narrow

focus• Phrase-final boundary tones specify final pitch

target– H% = F0 to relatively high final position– L% = F0 to relatively low final position


H%

5

How to study Mandarin intonation in naturalistic speech?

• Naturalistic data important • Tone-intonation interference

• “Intonation carriers” (Chao 1968)• final-rise and final-fall as sentence-final particles• can be carried on atonic sentence-final syllables• shuo-de bu dui asay-COMP not right PRT“That’s not right!” or “Is that not right?”


H%

6

Data and Methods

• Corpus: HKUST Mandarin Telephone (LDC)• brief telephone conversations between

Mainland speakers• Focus: sentence-final particle ma

• occurs with yes/no-questions, assertions, directives, and topical constituents

• “heightened commitment” to the illocution (Li 2006)

• Data: randomly selected utterances ending in ma (n=125 utterances)• coded for characteristics of speaker and

situation, discourse and utterance properties, phonetic and phonological variables


H%

7

Methods

• Quantitative analysis• regression

• uncover patterns of distribution

• Qualitative analysis• focus on “extreme” variants

• sketch a picture of meanings in interactional context


H%

8

Dependent Variables

• Phrase-final boundary tone: H%, L%• categorical variable

• Phrase-final lengthening: Duration of utterance-final ma• continuous variable, in milliseconds

• Pitch range of utterance-final ma• continuous variable, in bark


H%

9

Independent Variables• Speaker Sex: male, female

• same for interlocutor sex• Speaker Age: 18-40• “Accent”: Standard, Nonstandard

• rated by corpus builders• Turn-final: does ma occur at the end of

turn?• Clause Type: declarative, interrogative,

topicalization• Illocutionary Force: assertion, information

request, seek confirmation (CSQ)• Preceding Tone: lexical tone of syllable

preceding ma• Utterance Length: in syllables• Utterance Duration: in milliseconds• Utterance Pitch Range: in bark


H%

10

Tone choice overview


H%

11

Tone choice, continued


H%

12

“Rhetorical Questions”

Ex:wo bu shi mei qian maI not be no money Q'But I'm broke!'

• syntactic or pragmatic cues of interrogativity combined with assertive or directive force

9/10 “rhetorical questions” realized with low boundary tone (L%)


H%

13

Other L% Questions

• Distance from current talkA: jiu cong genben shang gaibian, cong ziji xiaoshihou de jiaoyu, cong zhexie haizi de jiaoyu ... jiu kaishi gaibian, danshi tai nan le“[We have to] start change from the roots, start from childhood education, start from the education of these children ... but it's too difficult.”

B: m, quan shi jun- junguozhuyi neizhong ma“All militarism and that sort of thing?”

A: na bu shi“No, not that.”


H%

14

What about H% declaratives?

• Hedging?A: qishi wo ganjue Hangzhou bing bu shi xiang wo xiangxiang zhong de name haowan a

“Actually I felt [the city of] Hangzhou really wasn't as fun as I would have imagined.”

B: qishi Hangzhou ye man haowan de ma, fengjing ting hao de, dui ba

“Actually Hangzhou is really rather fun, the scenery is rather good, right?”


H%

15

Tone Choice Summary

• Mandarin follows universal tendency to pair L% with declaratives and H% with yes/no-questions

• Exceptional pairings motivate noncanonical pragmatic readings and interactional stances • H% other-oriented, “checking”• L% distant, dissatisfied


H%

16

Ma Duration

• ni yizhi kandao wei ma“Did you watch it to the end?”

• Duration of ma quite variable


H%

17

Final lengthening


H%

18

Duration of final particle

• Is duration of ma meaningful? • Normalized duration measure based on

speech rate of utterance

dnorm = dma*(nsyls/ dutterance)*mean(dsyl)

• Regression model with normalized duration of ma as response


H%

19

Duration of final particle

• Major hypotheses• turn finality• longer in questions--involvement?• speaker characteristics--Gender, Age


H%

20

Model for final particle duration• Clause Type significant; Speaker Gender

nearly significant, large effect

• Men have shorter ma (~27 ms)• Questions have longer ma (~41 ms)• No effect for position in turn

Predictor Effect t value p valueIntercept 5.484 0.046

GenderMale 234 ms

-0.106 0.055 -1.934 0.056Female 261 ms

Clause TypeQuestion 270 ms

0.165 0.055 3.003 0.003Other 229 ms

Response = ln Normalized DurationCoef Std.E

Null deviance: 12.020, 121 df; Resid deviance:10.821, 119 df


H%

21

The context of ma lengthening

• aha yi bai duo ji le! zhen shi yi ge hen chang de Hanguo pianr a… aiya wo shuo kanxialai ye xuyao yiding de naixing la… ni yizhi kandao wei ma

“More than a hundred episodes! That really is a very long Korean TV series, wow I mean it requires some patience to keep watching -- did you watch it to the end?”


H%

22

Utterance-final particle pitch range

• Pitch range also varies widely. Does it:• covary with utterance pitch range?• disambiguate questions?• show gender effects?


H%

23

Predictors of final particle pitch range

Response = F0 range (bark)

Predictor Effect t value p valueIntercept 0.102 0.135

0.188 bark/ bark 0.188 0.046 4.088 0.000

0.1 bark/ sec 0.001 0.000 2.682 0.008

AccentStandard 1.31 bark

-0.254 0.071 -3.576 0.001Nonstandard 1.7 bark

GenderMale 1.21 bark

-0.120 0.058 -2.054 0.042Female 1.53 bark

Coef Std.E

Utt F0 Range

ma Duration

Null dev = 13.018, 117 df; Resid dev = 8.539, 113 df


H%

24

Summary

• Accent: lexical tone on atonic syllables a salient “nonstandard” feature

• Gender: men use briefer, more level ma, women longer ma with more pitch movement

• Why would there be a gender difference?


H%

25

Meanings, stances

• Illocution• Information request: H%• Assertion: L%

• Involvement, enthusiasm• H% declaratives, long ma, pitch movement• Questions also a (minimal) form of

involvement?• Disapproval

• L% Qs “I’m broke” and “Nationalism”• Petulant vs. skeptical


H%

26

Social variables

• Gender• Displays of “adorable petulance” (sajiao; Farris

1995) and enthusiasm enhanced by intonational features

• These affective displays are relatively gendered


H%

27

Conclusions

• Boundary tones: is ma relatively high or low?• clause type and illocution

• L%: declarative clause type or assertive force

• H% signals need to respond?

• ma Duration• clause type: longer in questions

• gender: shorter for men

• displays of interest and involvement

• ma Pitch Range• utterance pitch range and ma duration

• accent: less pitch range for standard speakers

• gender: wider pitch range for women


H%

28

Further Questions

• Is it just ma?• “commitment”• Most utterance-final particles index increased

affect• What techniques do men use to do

“enthusiasm”?• Utterance-wide effects

h%, l% and everything between

Documents