The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Meaning of Intonational Contours in the Interpretation of Discourse
Abstract
Recent investigations of the contribution that intonation makes to overall utterance and discourse interpretation promise new sources of information for the investigation of long-time concerns in natural-language processing.In Hirschberg and Pierrehumbert 1986 we proposed that intonational features such as phrasing, accmt pUuttTWIt, pilch rangt, and huIe represent important sources of information about the attmh0ru3l and the rntmt10rIJAl structures of discourse.I In this paper we examine the particular contribution of choice of tune, or int0ru3h0ru3l cantour, to discourse interpretation.In particular, we propose that a speaker (5) chooses a particular tune to convey a particular relationship between an utterance, currently perceived beliefs of a hearer or hearers (H), and anticipated contributions of subsequent utterances.We claim that these relationships are compositionalcomposed from the pitch aumts, phrase QCcmts, and bowndary tones that make up tunes.We further propose that the different aspects of tune meaning can be associated with different phonological domains.We assume the intorIJAtional phrase as our primary unit of meaning analysis.In the following discussion we put forward a first approximation of a compositional theory of tune interpretation.together with the phonological assumptions on which it is based and the evidence from which we have drawn our proposals.We assume Pierrehumbert's Wierrehumbert 198{);Beckman and Pierrehurnbert 1986a) theory of intonational description.which we describe in sections 2-3.In section 4 we present our general approach to intonational meaning.In sections 5 -7 we present the data upon which we base this account.In section 8 we explore avenues of further development for the theory and discuss implications for the study of discourse.2 Dimmslcn5 of IntOf1lltianai Variation PrrlimiruzriesIn describing intonation patterns, we distinguish str~, twu, phrasing, and PItch rar1Kt.5t-r~ refers to the rhythmic pattern or relative prominence of
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Koiso, H., Horiuchi, Y., Tutiya, S., Ichikawa, A., & Den, Y. (1998) · Language and Speech · doi:10.1177/002383099804100404 · Cited by 272
Calhoun, S., Carletta, J., Brenier, J. M., Mayo, N., Jurafsky, D., Steedman, M., & Beaver, D. (2010) · Language Resources and Evaluation · doi:10.1007/s10579-010-9120-1 · Cited by 174
Beyond Segments: Towards a L2 Intonation Learning Theory
Mennen, I. (2015) · Prosody, Phonology and Phonetics · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-45168-7_9 · Cited by 117
Speech and language markers of neurodegeneration: a call for global equity
García, A. M., de Leon, J., Tee, B. L., Blasi, D. E., & Gorno-Tempini, M. L. (2023) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awad253 · Cited by 102
The semantics of prosody: acoustic and perceptual evidence of prosodic correlates to word meaning
Nygaard, L. C., Herold, D. S., & Namy, L. L. (2009) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2008.01007.x · Cited by 104
Wagner, P., Beskow, J., Betz, S., Edlund, J., Gustafson, J., Eje Henter, G., Le Maguer, S., Malisz, Z., Székely, É., Tånnander, C., et al. (2019) · 10th ISCA Workshop on Speech Synthesis (SSW 10) · doi:10.21437/ssw.2019-19 · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J.
- Venue
- Intentions in Communication
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 1990-06-28
- Pages
- 271-312
- OpenAlex
- W2546732126
- Cited by
- 1,433
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.05
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.