Perception of Prosody in Russian Impersonal Phrases with the Meaning of Refusal: Linguistic and Paralinguistic Aspects | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2021. № 69. DOI: 10.17223/19986645/69/5

Perception of Prosody in Russian Impersonal Phrases with the Meaning of Refusal: Linguistic and Paralinguistic Aspects

The article examines the perception of Russian rising-falling pitch contours by native speakers. These contours have received much attention due to the fact that Russian does not mark grammatically the distinction between statements and yes/no questions; instead, prosodic features are used for this purpose. This study aimed to expand this line of research by using two impersonal phrases with the meaning of refusal as stimuli for a perception experiment. The main advantage of this choice is that these phrases can also convey paralinguistic elements of meaning, such as neutrality/non-neutrality and rudeness/politeness of request or refusal. An experiment was conducted in which 25 native speakers of Russian were asked to identify 90 artificial stimuli (phrases ne nado and khvatit with resynthesized rising-falling pitch contours presented in random order) as questions, neutral, rude or polite statements. The listeners could also mark the stimuli as “meaningless”. During the resynthesis, three acoustic parameters were manipulated: pitch alignment, pitch height and stressed vowel duration. Then the answers of the participants were analyzed as four binary choices. Generalized mixed effects logistic regression models were used to assess the effect of predictors on categorization task. For the question/statement distinction, a significant effect of all fixed variables was found. These results generally replicate the findings of previous studies and show that Russian speakers use late peak alignment enhanced by high peak scaling as the principal acoustic cue for polar questions. For the neutral/non-neutral statement distinction, also a strong effect of peak height and alignment was found. These results conform Gussenhoven’s theory of “biological codes” but at the same time do not contradict the recurrent claims that assume the existence of a distinct pitch accent used for focus-marking in Russian. Finally, to identify the non-neutral statements as “rude refusal, order” or “polite refusal, request”, the participants consistently used the vowel duration cue. Phrases with longer stressed vowels were more often perceived as polite, and vice versa. A significant effect of peak alignment on “politeness” was found, while the analyses did not reveal the effect of peak height on this distinction. To sum up, the experiment demonstrates an interplay between different acoustic cues in the native perception of an artificially created Russian rising-falling pitch contours continuum. Further investigations are required in order to determine more precisely the linguistic and paralinguistic functions of these form-function relations.

Download file
Counter downloads: 567

Keywords

modern standard Russian, intonation, yes/no question, pitch accent, vowel duration, perception experiment, politeness

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Duryagin Pavel V.Ca’ Foscari University of Venicepavel.duryagin@unive.it
Fokina Maria V.Lomonosov Moscow State Universitymfokina@list.ru
Всего: 2

References

Pierrehumbert J. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation : PhD thesis, MIT. Distributed 1988. Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1980.
Beckman M., Pierrehumbert J. Intonational Structure in Japanese and English // Phonology Yearbook III. 1986. Р. 15-70.
Ladd D.R. Intonational Phonology (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Gussenhoven C. The Phonology of Tone and Intonation. Cambridge : Cambridge University, 2004.
Rathcke T. A perceptual study on Russian questions and statements // Arbeitsberichte des Instituts fur Phonetik und digitale Sprachverarbeitung der Universitat Kiel (AIPUK). 2006. № 37. Р. 51-62.
Hockett C.F. The Origin of Speech // Scientific American. 1960. № 203. Р. 88-111.
Kohler K.J. Categorical pitch perception // Proc. XIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Tallinn, 1987. Vol. 5. Р. 3З1-ЗЗЗ.
Pierrehumbert J., Steele S. Categories of Tonal Alignment in English // Phonetica. 1990. № 47. Р. 181-196.
Ladd D.R., Morton R. The perception of intonational emphasis: Continuous or categorical? // Journal of Phonetics.1997. № 25. Р. 313-342.
Кодзасов С.В. Исследования в области русской просодии. М. : Языки славянских культур, 2009.
Keijsper C. Recent intonation research and its implications for teaching Russian // Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics. 1992. № 17. Р. 151-214.
Оде С. Перцептивная эквивалентность реализаций типов интонационных конструкций Е.А. Брызгуновой // Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics. 1992. № 17. С. 227-284.
Йокояма О.Ц. Нейтральная и ненейтральная интонация в русском языке: автосегментная интерпретация системы интонационных конструкций // Вопросы языкознания. 2003. № 5. С. 99-122.
Igarashi Y. Russian Interrogatives and Intonational Categories // The Discourse Potential of Underspecified Structures / ed. by A. Steube. Berlin ; New York : Walter de Gruyter, 2008. Р. 227-270.
Брызгунова Е.А. Интонация // Русская грамматика / гл. ред. Н.Ю. Шведова. М., 1980. Т. 1. С. 96-122.
Светозарова Н.Д. Интонационная система русского языка. Л. : Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та, 1982.
Ode C. Russian intonation: A perceptual description. Amsterdam : Rodopi, 1989.
Ode C. Neutralization or Truncation? The perception of two Russian pitch accents on utterance-final syllables // Speech Communication. 2005. № 47 (1/2). Р. 71-79.
Ode C. Transcription of Russian intonation ToRI, an interactive research tool and learning module on the internet // Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics. 2008. № 34.
’t Hart J., Collier R., Cohen A. A perceptual study of intonation: An experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Makarova V. Perceptual correlates of sentence-type intonation in Russian and Japanese // J. Phonetics. 2001. № 29. Р. 137-154.
Makarova V. The effect of F0 peak alignment, height and segmental base on sentence type perception across languages // Proc. XVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Barcelona, 2003. Р. 1285-1288.
Makarova V. The effect of pitch peak alignment on sentence type identification in Russian // Language and speech. 2007. № 50, р! 3. Р. 385-422.
Rathcke T. Relevance of F0 peak shape and alignment for the perception of a functional contrast in Russian // Proc. of the 3rd Conference on Speech Prosody. 2006. р. 65-68.
Silverman K., Beckman M., Pitrelli J., Ostendorf M., Wightman C., Price P., Pierrehumbert J., Hirschberg J. TOBI: a standard for labeling English prosody // Proc. of Second International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. 1992. Р. 867-870.
Jun Sun-Ah. Editor. Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford University Press, 2005.
Jun Sun-Ah. Editor. Prosodic Typology II: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford University Press, 2014.
Rathcke T. How Truncating Are ‘Truncating Languages’? Evidence from Russian and German // Phonetica. 2017. № 73. Р. 194-228.
Igarashi Y. How many falling intonation patterns in Russian?: categories of F0 alignment // Programme & Book of Abstracts: Between and Stress and Tone. 2005. Р. 32-33.
Meyer R., Mleinek I. How prosody signals force and focus - A study of pitch accents in Russian yes-no questions // Journal of Pragmatics. 2006. № 38. Р. 1615-1635.
Пужаева С.Ю., Герасименко Е.А., Захарова Е.С., Рахилина Е.В. Автоматическое извлечение дискурсивных формул из текстов на русском языке // Вестник НГУ. Серия: Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация. 2018. № 16, 2. С. 5-18.
Дурягин П. В., Рахилина Е. В. Просодические средства маркирования полисемии дискурсивной формулы да ну // Тезисы VI Международной научной конференции «Культура русской речи». URL: https://drive.google.eom/file/d/1eXDZzrSpHqh YU 3 fPqVkOKMSPGnKkTXuM (дата обращения: 10.10.2019).
Arantes P. Time-normalization of fundamental frequency contours: a hands-on tutorial // Courses on Speech Prosody / ed. by A.R. Meireles. Newcastle upon Tyne : Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015. Р. 98-123.
Boersma P., Weenink D. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.1.04, retrieved 28 September 2019. URL: http://www.praat.org/
Nolan F. Intonational equivalence: an experimental evaluation of pitch scales // Proc. XVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Barcelona, 2003. Р. 771-774.
Peirce J.W., Gray J.R., Simpson S., MacAskill M.R., Hochenberger R., Sogo H., Kastman E., Linde0v J. PsychoPy2: experiments in behavior made easy // Behavior Research Methods. 2019. № 51. Р. 195.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, 2018. URL: https://www.R-project.org/
Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B., Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 // Journal of Statistical Software. 2015. № 67 (1). Р. 1-48.
Levshina N. How to do linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015.
Fox J., Weisberg S. An {R} Companion to Applied Regression, Third Edition. Thousand Oaks CA : Sage, 2019.
Ludecke D. sjPlot: Data Visualization for Statistics in Social Science. 2019. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1308157.
Wickham H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York : Springer-Verlag, 2016.
Igarashi Y. Intonation patterns in Russian interrogatives - Phonetic analyses and phonological interpretations // Prosody and Syntax, Usage-Based Linguistic Informatics 3 / eds by Yuji Kawaguchi, Ivan Fonagy and Tsunekazu Moriguchi. Amsterdam : John Benjamins, 2006. Р. 175-196.
Nadeu M., Prieto P. Pitch range, gestural information, and perceived politeness in Catalan // Journal of Pragmatics. 2011. № 43. Р. 841-854.
Ohala J.J. An ethological perspective on common cross-language utilization of F0 of voice // Phonetica. 1984. № 41. Р. 1-16.
Брызгунова Е.А. Основные типы интонационных конструкций и их функционирование в русском языке. Статья вторая // Русский язык за рубежом. 1973. № 2. С. 44-52.
Gryllia S., Baltazani M., Arvaniti A. The role of pragmatics and politeness in explaining prosodic variability // Speech Prosody 2018. Urbana, Illinois : Speech Prosody Special Interest Group, 2018.
 Perception of Prosody in Russian Impersonal Phrases with the Meaning of Refusal: Linguistic and Paralinguistic Aspects | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2021. № 69. DOI: 10.17223/19986645/69/5

Perception of Prosody in Russian Impersonal Phrases with the Meaning of Refusal: Linguistic and Paralinguistic Aspects | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2021. № 69. DOI: 10.17223/19986645/69/5

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 1576