Intonation usage standard of canonical imperatives: expressing emotions | Yazyk i Kultura – Language and Culture. 2021. № 55. DOI: 10.17223/19996195/55/4

Intonation usage standard of canonical imperatives: expressing emotions

Intonation usage standard in discourse as object of experimental research raises a question about changes in traditional paradigm of linguistic research. Systemic use of cognitive-discursive approach to experimental research suggests the necessity of taking the data obtained by other sciences connected with the human cognition as foundation. Knowing how psychic mechanisms of attention and memory function in speech comprehension and production the researcher can identify the direction cognitive processes take in discourse, the normalizing function of probability as significant characteristic of this activity. Interdisciplinarity helps to establish new means of formalization and quantification of linguistic units in discourse, create a unified description of intonation usage standards in different types of discourse. Methodology of experimental discourse analysis helps to resolve difficulties motivated by specific character of intonation as the objective of research: its high variability, its dependence on the discourse function of the utterance provide for the multifactorality of discourse research and the difficulty of controlling the variables in it. Giving an accurate definition to the concept of naturalness/spontaneity of speech, observing a rigid experiment design, using corpus analysis to investigate the contextual environment of speech allows to show and prove the causal relationship between the prosodic components of the intonation pattern of the utterance, to formalize additional factors that influence the usage of language units in speech (attractors and fuzzifiers). Having defined the discourse as a complex structure of knowledge that can be represented in a text with characteristics that reflect the application of that knowledge in practical activity, the cognitive-discursive approach gives logical and consistent foundation to use the dramatic (fiction) texts in the research devoted to intonation usage standard. Corpus analysis gives vast information on discursive conditions of utterance production and helps to identify factors that can influence the intonational organization of the utterance performed by the reader. Activation of the readers' psychic mechanisms of attention and memory by the elements of the text used by the authors is possible if there is “common knowledge” of rules and standards that control the effectiveness of the discourse shared by all its participants. To ensure the control over variables in the experimental research of intonation usage standard canonical imperatives were used in experimental research. They are characterized by unique syntactic structure and perlocutionary force. Corpus analysis, acoustic analysis and statistical evaluation of its results, comparative analysis of prosodic data obtained in the research allow to make the following conclusions about intonation usage standards of canonical imperatives in discourse: 1. The peculiarity of intonation usage in canonical imperatives becomes apparent at the stage of context environment analysis: most frequent verbs of speech causality do not denote the illocutionary force of the utterance, but rather mark its perlocu-tionary function. Verbs of speech causality denote characteristics of the immediate speech production process and mark the emotional state of the speaker as “neutral/emotional”. At the same time, they do not necessarily name the emotion. Intonation structures accompanied by verbs of speech causality that mark utterances as “emotional” are characterized by the higher level of intensity/loudness and greater variability of intensity parameter in the utterance. The distribution of the intensity both in the utterances marked as “neutral” and “emotional” is similar. 2. F0 parameter is considered dominating in the intonational structure of an utterance. Its behavior in the intonation contours of the utterance in the samples does not show direct and unambiguous correlation to the emotional meanings of utterances as is described in the codified intonation standard of the English language. Intonation usage norm of canonical imperative utterances contains intonation constructions of two types: in the 1st type construction the tonal movement is performed on the duration of several adjacent syllables, in the 2nd type constructions the tonal movement id performed within one syllable. Falling tune is predominant in intonation contours of all types. Rising tune is more characteristic for the intonation constructions of the 1st type. Complex tunes among which Fall Rise и Fall Rise Fall are most frequent appear in the intonation constructions of the 2nd type.

Download file
Counter downloads: 32

Keywords

intonation usage standard, discourse, experiment design, canonical imperative, verb of speech causality, intonation contour, intensity, emotional weight index, attractor, fuzzifier

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Zhigalev B.A.Linguistics University of Nizhniy Novgorodzhigalev@lunn.ru
Nenasheva Iu.A.South Ural State Humanitarian Pedagogical Universitynenashevayua@cspu.ru
Zhigaleva K.B.State University of Nizhny Novgorodkbzhigaleva@gmail.com
Serikov V. V.Institute of Education Development Strategy of the Russian Academy of Educationvladislav.cerikoff@yandex.ru
Всего: 4

References

Кубрякова Е.С. В поисках сущности языка: Когнитивные исследования. М. : Знак, 2012.
Арутюнова Н.Д. Дискурс // Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь / гл. ред. В.Н. Ярцева. М., 1990. С. 136-137.
Красных В.В. Основы психолингвистики и теории коммуникации : курс лекций. М. : Гнозис, 2001.
Фрумкина Р.М., Василевич А.П., Герганов Е.Н. Субъективные оценки частот элементов текста как прогнозирующий фактор // Вероятностное прогнозирование в речи. М. : Наука, 1971. С. 70-93.
Величковский Б.М. Когнитивная наука : Основы психологии познания : в 2 т. М. : Смысл : Академия, 2006.
Лурия А.Р. Язык и сознание / под ред. Е.Д. Хомской. 2-е изд. М. : Изд-во МГУ, 1998.
Tomasello M. Becoming human: A theory of ontogeny. Harvard : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2019.
Федяева Н.Д. Нормы в пространстве языка. М. : Флинта, 2016.
Костомаров В.Г. Язык текущего момента: понятие правильности. СПб. : Златоуст, 2014.
Кравченко А.В. От языкового мифа к биологической реальности: переосмысляя познавательные установки языкознания. М. : Рукописные памятники Древней Руси, 2013.
Болдырев Н.Н. Проблемы вербальной коммуникации в когнитивном контексте // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2017. № 2. С. 5-14.
Болдырев Н.Н. Языковые категории как формат знания // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2006. № 2. С. 5-22.
Федорова О.В. Экспериментальный анализ дискурса. М. : Языки славянской культуры, 2014.
Кибрик А.А. Анализ дискурса в когнитивной перспективе. М., 2003.
Кацнельсон С.Д. Типология языка и речевое мышление М. : Едиториал УРСС, 2002.
Храковский В.С. Повелительность // Теория функциональной грамматики. Темпоральность. Модальность. Л. : Наука, 1990. С. 185-243.
Шаховский В.И. Лингвистическая теория эмоций. М. : Гнозис, 2008.
Шаховский В.И. Эмоции - мотивационная основа человеческого сознания // Вопросы психолингвистики. 2006. № 2. С. 64-69.
Кибрик А.А., Подлесская В.И. Рассказы о сновидениях: Корпусное исследование устного русского дискурса / под ред. А.А. Кибрика, В.И. Подлесской. М. : ЯСК, 2009.
Xu Y. In defense of lab speech // Journal of Phonetics. 2010. № 38. Р. 329-336.
Kibrik A.A. Reference in discourse. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2011.
Aikhenvald A.Y. Imperatives and Commands. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010.
Aikhenvald A. Imperatives and Commands: A Cross-Linguistic View // Commands: A Cross-Linguistic Typology. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2017.
Jary M., Kissine M. Imperatives. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Kaufmann M. Interpreting Imperatives. Dordrecht, Springer, 2012.
Boersma P., Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.1.47, retrieved 21 May 2021. URL: http://www.praat.org/
Mertens P. From pitch stylization to automatic tonal annotation of speech corpora // Rhapsodie. A prosodic and syntactic treebank for spoken French. Studies in Corpus Linguistics 89. Amsterdam : Benjamins, 2019. Р. 233-250.
Gimson's Pronunciation of English. 8th ed. Revised by A. Cruttenden. London ; New York : Routledge, 2014.
O'Connor J.D., Arnold G.F. Intonation of Colloquial English. A Practical Handbook. 2nd ed. Singapore : Longman, 1973.
O'Connor J.D. Better English Pronunciation. London : Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Wells J.C. English Intonation. An Introduction. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Bolinger D. Intonation and Its Parts: Melody in Spoken English. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1985.
Bolinger D. Intonation and Its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1985.
Ladd D. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Warren P. Uptalk: The Phenomenon of Rising Intonation. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Eery C. Intonation and Prosodic Structure. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Fletcher J. Compound Rises and «Uptalk» in Spoken English // INTERSPEECH-2005. Р. 1381-1384.
 Intonation usage standard of canonical imperatives: expressing emotions | Yazyk i Kultura – Language and Culture. 2021. № 55. DOI: 10.17223/19996195/55/4

Intonation usage standard of canonical imperatives: expressing emotions | Yazyk i Kultura – Language and Culture. 2021. № 55. DOI: 10.17223/19996195/55/4

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 345