Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this tutorial we present evidence that, because syntax does not fully predict the way that spoken utterances are organized, prosody is a significant issue for studies of auditory sentence processing. We describe the basic elements and principles of current prosodic theory, review the psycholinguistic evidence that supports an active role for prosodic structure in sentence representation, and provide a road map of references that contain more complete arguments about prosodic structure and prominence. Because current theories do not predict the precise prosodic shape that a particular utterance will take, it is important to determine the prosodic choices that a speaker has made for utterances that are used in an auditory sentence processing study. To this end, we provide information about practical tools such as systems for signal display and prosodic transcription, and several caveats which we have found useful to keep in mind.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abercrombie, D. (1965). Syllable quantity and enclitics in English. InStudies in Phonetics and Linguistics, Oxford University Press.

  • Abercrombie, D. (1973). A phonetician's view of verse structure. In W.E. Jones and J. Laver (eds),Phonetics in Linguistics: a book of readings, London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, M. E. (1996). The parsing of prosody.Language and Cognitive Processes (to appear).

  • Beckman, M. E., & Edwards, J. (1990). Lengthenings and shortenings and the nature of prosodic constituency. In J. Kingston and M.E. Beckman (eds),Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and the Physics of Speech, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, M. E., & Edwards, J. (1994). Articulatory evidence for differentiating stress categories. In P. Keating (ed),Phonological Structure and Phonetic Form: Papers in Laboratory Phonology III, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, M. E., & Pierrehumbert, J. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English.Phonology Yearbook 3, 255–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkovits, R. (1993). Utterance-final lengthening and the duration of final stop closures.J. Phonetics 21, 479–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkovits, R. (1993a). Progressive utterance-final lengthening in syllables with final fricatives.Language and Speech 36, 89–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickmore, L. (1990). Branching nodes and prosodic categories: Evidence from Kinyambo. In S. Inkelas and D. Zec (eds),The Phonology-Syntax Connection, U. Chicago Press, 1–18.

  • Bolinger, D. (1958). A theory of pitch accents in English.Word 14, 109–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolinger, D. (1965). Pitch accent and sentence rhythm. In Bolinger, D.L.,Forms of English: Accent, Morpheme, Order, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 163 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolinger, D. (1981).Two kinds of vowels, two kinds of rhythm. Manuscript distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana.

  • Brown, E., & Miron, M.S. (1971). Lexical and syntactic predictors of the distribution of pause time in reading.J. Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 10, 658–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chafe, W. (1980). ed.,The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, C.-C. (1970). Domain of phonological rule application. In J.M. Sadock and A.L. Vanek (eds),Studies Presented to Robert B. Lee by his Students, Edmonton: Linguistic Research 39–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, C.-C. (1973).A Synchronic Phonology of Mandarin Chinese. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968).The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, G. N. (1978). Tone and syntax in Ewe. In D.J. Napoli (ed),Elements of Tone, Stress and Intonation, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 21–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. M. (1991). Laryngeal and oral gestures in English /ptr/.Proceedings of the XIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Aix-en-Provence, Vol. 2, 50–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. E., & Paccia-Cooper, J. (1980).Syntax and Speech. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cruttenden, A. (1986).Intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, A., Mehler, J., Norris, D. G., & Segui, J. (1986). The syllables differing role in the segmentation of French and English.Journal of Memory & Language 25, 385–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilley, L., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1995). Variability in glottalization of word-onset vowels in American English.Proc XIIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Stockholm, Vol. 4, pp. 586–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilley, L., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Ostendorf, M. (1994). Prosodic constraints in glottalization of vowel-initial syllables in American English.JASA 95 (5-pt. 2) 2978–2979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilley, L., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Ostendorf, M. (under revision),Glottalization of vowel-initial words as a function of prosodic structure.

  • Edwards, J., Beckman, M. E., & Fletcher, J. (1991). The articulatory kinematics of final lengthening.JASA 89 (1), 369–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewen, C., & Anderson, J. (eds.) (1987).Phonology Yearbook 4: Syntactic Conditions on Phonological Rules. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fant, J., Krukenberg, A., & Nord, L. (1991). Stress patterns and rhythm in the reading of prose and poetry with analogies to music performance. Presented at the Music, Language, Speech, and Brain International Wenner Gren Symposium, Stockholm.

  • Ferreira, F. (1991). Creation of prosody during sentence production.Psychological Review 100 (2), 233–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A., Bever, T. G., & Garrett, M. F. (1974).The Psychology of Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fougeron, C. (1996). Articulation of French nasal segments depending on their prosodic position. Presented at the January meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego.

  • Fougeron, C., & Keating, P. (1995). Demarcating prosodic groups with articulation.JASA 97 (5-pt 2), 3384 and UCLA ms.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, M. F., Bever, T. G., & Fodor, J. A. (1966). The active use of grammar in speech perception.Perception and Psychophysics 1, 30–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerken, L. A., Jusczyk, P. W., & Mandel, D. R. (1994). When prosody fails to cue syntactic structure: Nine-month-olds' sensitivity to phonological vs. syntactic phrases.Cognition 51, 237–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P., & Grosjean, F. (1983). Performance structures: A psycholinguistic and linguistic appraisal.Cognitive Psychology 15, 411–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhor, R. S. (1976).Sentential determinants of duration in speech. MIT ms.

  • Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972). Pauses, clauses, sentences.Language and Speech 15, 103–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosjean, F., Grosjean, L., & Lane, H. (1979). The patterns of silence: Performance structures in sentence production.Cognitive Psychology 11, 58–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gussenhoven, C. (1984).On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gussenhoven, C. (1992). Intonational phrasing and the prosodic hierarchy.Phonologica 1988, 89–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gussenhoven, C., & Reitveld, A. C. M. (1992). Intonation contours, prosodic structure and preboundary lengthening.J. Phonetics 20, 283–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haegeman, L. (1993).Introduction to Government and Binding Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, K., & Selkirk, E. O. (1987). Government and tonal phrasing in Papago.Phonology Yearbook 4: 151–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halle, M., & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1987).An Essay on Stress. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1967).Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • 't Hart, J., Collier, R., & Cohen, A. (1990).A Perceptual Study of Intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1981).A metrical theory of stress rules. MIT PhD thesis, revised version distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana. Published by Garland Press, NY, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1983). A grid-based theory of English meter.Linguistic Inquiry 14, 357–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1984). The phonology of rhythm in English.Linguistic Inquiry 15, 33–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1989). The prosodic hierarchy in meter. In P. Kiparsky and G. Youmans (eds.),Phonetics and Phonology, Vol 1: Rhythm and Meter. San Diego: Academic Press. pp. 201–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1989a). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology.Linguistic Inquiry 20, 253–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1995).Metrical Stress Theory: Principles and Case Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B., & Lahiri, A. (1991). Bengali intonational phonology.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 47–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeman, P., & Allen, J. (1995).The TRAINS 93 Dialogues. TRAINS Technical Note 94-2, University of Rochester.

  • Horne, M. (1990). Empirical evidence for a deletion formulation of the rhythm rule in English.Linguistics 28, 959–981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, L. (1985).A theory of phonological weight. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkelas, S. (1989).Prosodicy constituency in the lexicon. U. Mass Amherst PhD thesis.

  • Inkelas, S., & Zec, D. (1990). (eds),The Phonology-Syntax Connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkelas, S., & Zec, D. (1993). Auxiliary reduction without empty categories: A prosodic account.Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory 8, 205–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, J., & Mester, R.-A. (1992).Weak layering and word binarity. University of Santa Cruz ms.

  • Jun, S.-A. (1993).The phonetics and phonology of Korean prosody. Ohio State University PhD thesis.

  • Jusczyk, P. W., & Aslin, R. N. (1995). Infants' detection of the sound patterns of words in fluent speech.Cognitive Psychology 28, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, D. (1976).Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology. Ms. distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana.

  • Kaisse, E. (1985).Connected Speech: The Interaction of Syntax and Phonology. Orlando: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaisse, E. M., & Zwicky, A. M. (1987). Introduction: Syntactic influences on phonological rules. In C. Ewen and J. Anderson (eds.),Phonology Yearbook 4, Cambridge Univesity Press.

  • Katada, F. (1990). On the representation of moras: Evidence from a language game.Linguistic Inquiry 21, 641–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, M. (1989). Rhythm and language change in English.J. Memory and Language 28, 690–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenstowicz, M. (1994).Phonology in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, P. (1979). Metrical structure assignment is cyclic.Linguistic Inquiry 10, 421–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisseberth, C., & Abasheikh, M. K. (1974). Vowel length in Chimwi:ni—a case study of the role of grammar in phonology. In M.M.L. Galy, R.A. Fox, and A. Bruck (eds),Papers from the Parasession on Natural Phonology, Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klatt, D. H. (1976). Linguistics uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic and perceptual evidence.JASA 59, 1208–1220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krakow, R. (1989).The articulatory organization of syllables: A kinematic analysis of labial and velic gestures. Yale University PhD thesis.

  • Ladd, R. (1986). Intonational phrasing: The case for recursive prosodic structure.Phonology Yearbook 3, 311–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, R. (to appear 1996).Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, R., & Campbell, N. (1991). Theories of prosodic structure: Evidence from syllable duration.Proceedings of the XIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Aix-en-Provence, II, 290–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladefoged, P. (1975).A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladefoged, P., & Broadbert, D. E. (1960). Perception of sequence in auditory events.Quarterly J. of Experimental Psychology 13, 162–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehiste, I. (1973). Phonetic disambiguation of syntactic ambiguity,Glossa F, 107–121.

  • Lehiste, I. (1974). Interaction between test word duration and the length of utterance.Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 17, 160–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehiste, I., Olive, J. P., & Streeter, L. A. (1976). The role of duration in disambiguating syntactically ambiguous sentences.JASA 60, 1199–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, M. Y. (1975).The intonational system of English. MIT Linguistics PhD thesis.

  • Liberman, M. Y., & Prince, A. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm.Linguistic Inquiry 8, 249–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, P. (1960). Some acoustic correlates of word stress in American English.JASA 32, 451–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maeda, S. (1974). A characterization of fundamental frequency contours of speech.Quarterly Progress Report, MIT Research Laboratory of Electronics 114, 193–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, E. (1970). Toward an analysis of subjective phrase structure.Psychological Bulletin 74, 153–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. J. (1993). A case of surface constraint violation.Canadian Journal of Linguistics 38 (2), 169–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. J., & Prince, A. (1995). Prosodic morphology. In J. Goldsmith (ed),A Handbook of Phonological Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCawley, J. D. (1968).The Phonological Component of a Grammar of Japanese. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehler, J., Dommergues, J. Y., & Frauenfelder, U. (1981). The syllable's role in speech segmentation.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20, 298–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986).Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Connor, J. D., & Arnold, G. F. (1961),Intonation of Colloquial English. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostendorf, M., Price, P., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1995).The Boston University radio news corpus. Boston University ECS Technical Report ECS-95-001.

  • Otake, T., Hatano, G., Cutler, A., & Mehler, J. (1993). Mora or syllable? Speech segmentation in Japanese.J. Memory and Language 32, 258–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierrehumbert, J. (1980).The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. MIT Linguistics PhD thesis. Distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana.

  • Pierrehumbert, J., & Beckman, M. B. (1988).Japanese Tone Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In P. Cohen, J. Morgan and M. Pollack (eds),Intentions in Communication, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierrehumbert, J., & Talkin, D. (1992). Lenition of /h/ and glottal stop. In G.J. Docherty and D.R. Ladd (eds),Papers in Laboratory Phonology II: Gesture, Segment, Prosody Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pike, K. (1945).The Intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilon, R. (1981). Segmentation of speech in a foreign language.J. Psycholinguistic Research, 10, 113–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitrelli, J., Beckman, M. E., & Hirschberg, J. (1994). Evaluation of prosodic transcription labelling reliability in the ToBI framework. InProceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), Yokohama, Japan, VI, 123–126.

  • Port, R. R., Dalby, J., & O'Dell, M. (1986). Evidence for mora timing in Japanese.JASA 81 (5), 1574–1585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prevost, S., & Steedman M. (1994). Specifying intonation from context for speech synthesis.Speech Communication 15, 139–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, P. J., Ostendorf, M., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Fong, C. (1991). The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation.JASA 90, 2956–2970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince, A. (1983). Relating to the grid.Linguistic Inquiry 14, 19–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993).Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University and University of Colorado ms.

  • Pulgram, E. (1970).Syllable, Word, Nexus, Cursus. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, D. R. (1982). Duration as a cue to the perception of a phrase boundary.J. Acoustical Society of America 71, 996–1007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1972).The phrase phonology of English and French. MIT Linguistics PhD thesis, distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington Indiana, 1981.

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1978). On prosodic structure and its relation to syntactic structure. In T. Fretheim (ed),Nordic Prosody II, Trondheim: TAPIR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1980). Prosodic domains in phonology: Sanskrit revisited. In M. Aronoff and M.-L. Kean (eds),Juncture, Anna Libri, PO Box 876, Saratoga, Calif. 107–129.

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1984).Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology.Phonology Yearbook 3, 371–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1993). Modularity in constraints on prosodic structure. Ms., presented at the ESCA Workshop on Prosody, Lund.

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1993a).Accent focus and given/new: The role for focus projection. U Mass. Amherst ms.

  • Selkirk, E. O. (1994).

  • Selkirk, E. O. (to appear). The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Martin and K. Demuth (eds),International Conference on Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition, Brown University, Providence RI, Hillsdale N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Selkirk, E. O., & Shen, X. (1990). Prosodic domains in Shanghai Chinese. In S. Inkelas and D. Zec (eds),The Phonology-Syntax Connection. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O., & Tateishi, K. (1988). Constraints on minor phrase formation in Japanese.Papers from the Twenty-fourth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E. O., & Tateishi, K. (1991). Syntax and downstep in Japanese. In C. Georgopoulos, and R. Ishihara (eds.),Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sereno, J. A., & Jongman, A. (1995). Acoustic correlates of grammatical class.Language and Speech 38, 57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1988). Acoustic phonetic correlates of stress shift.JASA 84, S1, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1992). The role of word structure in segmental serial ordering.Cognition 42, 213–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1992a). Stress shift as pitch accent placement: Within-word early accent placement in American English. InProceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Banff, v. 1 pp. 747–750.

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1995). The importance of phonological transcription in empirical approaches to ‘stress shift’ vs. ‘early accent.’ In B. Connell and A. Arvaniti (eds),Phonology and Phonetic Evidence: Papers in Laboratory Phonology IV, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Ostendorf, M., & Ross, K. (1994). Stress shift and early pitch accent placement in lexical items in American English.J. Phonetics 22, 357–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih, C.-L. (1986).The prosodic domain of tone sandhi in Chinese. UCSD PhD thesis.

  • Silva, D. J. (1989). Determining the domain for intervocalic stop voicing in Korean. In S. Kunoet al. (eds.) Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics III. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, K. (1987).The structure and processing of fundamental frequency contours. Cambridge University PhD thesis.

  • Silverman, K., Beckman, M. B., Pitrelli, J., Ostendorf, M., Wightman, C., Price, P., Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1992). ToBI: A standard for labeling English prosody. InProceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), Banff, II, 867–870.

  • Sluijter, A. M. C. (1995).Phonetic Correlates of Stress and Accent. Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics, Den Haag: CIP-Gegevens Koninklijke Bibliotheek, University of Leyden PhD thesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluijter, A. M. C., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Stevens, K. N., & van Heuven, V. (1995). Supralaryngeal resonance and glottal pulse shape as correlates of stress and accent in English. InProceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Stockholm, II, 630–633.

  • Sluijter, A. M. C., & van Heuven, V. J. (to appear). Effects of focus distribution, pitch accent and lexical stress on the temporal organization of syllables in Dutch.Phonetica.

  • Steedman, M. (1991). Structure and intonation.Language 68, 260–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, K. N. (1994). Prosodic influences on glottal waveform: Preliminary data. InProceedings of the International Symposium on Prosody, Yokohama, 53–64.

  • Streeter, L. (1978). Acoustic determinants of phrase boundary perception.JASA 64, 1582–1592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suci, G. (1967). The validity of pause as an index of units in language.J. Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 6, 26–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turk, A. E., & Sawusch, J. R. (1995). The domain of the durational effects of accent.Speech Group Working Papers, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass, Vol X, 42–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderslice, R., & Ladefoged, P. (1972). Binary suprasegmental features and transformational word-accentuation rules.Language 48, 819–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, J. R., Doughtie, E. B., & Yom, L. (1974). Identification of structural components of an unknown language.J. Psycholinguistic Research 3, 262–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wightman, C. W., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Ostendorf, M., & Price, P. J. (1992). Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries.JASA 91 (3), 1707–1717.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Speech Communications Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusettes Institute of Technology, 02139, Cambridge, Massachusettes

    Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel

  2. Department of Linguistics, University of Edinburgh, EH8 9LL, Edinburgh, UK

    Alice E. Turk

Authors
  1. Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alice E. Turk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel.

Additional information

We thank the following for discussions of specific points or for their comments on portions earlier drafts, which improved the paper substantially: Ann Bradlow, Ronnie Cann, Miriam Eckert, Merrill Garrett, Caroline Heycock, Pat Keating, Sharon Manuel, Janet Nicol, Lisa Selkirk, Mark Steedman, and two anonymous reviewers.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Turk, A.E. A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. J Psycholinguist Res 25, 193–247 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01708572

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01708572

Keywords

Search

Navigation