29.472, Review: Language Acquisition; Linguistic Theories; Phonologies: Goedemans, Heinz, Hulst (2016)

The LINGUIST List linguist at listserv.linguistlist.org
Sat Jan 27 18:48:18 UTC 2018


LINGUIST List: Vol-29-472. Sat Jan 27 2018. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 29.472, Review: Language Acquisition; Linguistic Theories; Phonologies: Goedemans, Heinz, Hulst (2016)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté,
                                   Michael Czerniakowski)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Clare Harshey <clare at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 13:48:12
From: Roman Lesnov [rlor84 at gmail.com]
Subject: Dimensions of Phonological Stress

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36282497


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/27/27-5155.html

EDITOR: Jeffrey N. Heinz
EDITOR: Rob  Goedemans
EDITOR: Harry  van der Hulst
TITLE: Dimensions of Phonological Stress
PUBLISHER: Cambridge University Press
YEAR: 2016

REVIEWER: Roman Lesnov, Northern Arizona University

REVIEWS EDITOR: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

This volume is an accumulation of empirical research into the nature of
phonological stress and accent. The projects included in the book are revised
manuscripts that were presented at the Conference on Stress and Accent
(University of Delaware, 29 November – 1 December 2012). In a sense, the
volume may be considered a younger brother and a logical successor of van der
Hulst’s (2014) Word Stress: Theoretical and Typological Issues. While the
volume by van der Hulst (2014) sets groundwork by discussing the definition of
stress and ways to analyze it, the present collection further advances the
field of phonological stress by investigating it along the two focal themes –
namely the representation of stress and the acquisition of stress. 

The content of the volume would not appeal to a general audience. The targeted
reader is most likely a professor of theoretical or applied linguistics with a
close specialization in suprasegmental phonology and, particularly, in
phonological stress. Graduate students with an interest in phonological
prominence will also find this volume useful. Due to the volume’s focus on
metrical models of stress representations, one could also expect computational
linguists and speech scientists to be potential beneficiaries of the materials
included in the volume. The book does not have a focus on any particular
language – rather, it incorporates data from the StressTyp2 database, which
enabled the authors to use a range of languages and language families. In this
respect, the volume may be especially appealing to professional international
audiences.  

The book contains 11 chapters in addition to the introduction, and an index.
The index accumulates major key words and contains references to all the
particular languages that were researched in the studies of each chapter. It
should be noted, however, that the list of the key words is not exhaustive and
occasionally fails to locate a concept or terminology that might be of
interest to the professional audience. Each chapter is followed by a list of
references, which constitute a very useful feature of this volume. They will
prove invaluable for graduate students interested in phonological stress who
have not yet fully familiarized themselves with the related literature. The
contents and general conclusions from each chapter are summarized below.

Chapters 1 through 6 deal with stress and accent representation, the first
overarching theme of the volume. Chapter 1 (Metrical Incoherence: Diachronic
Sources and Synchronic Analysis, by M. Gordon) explores the phenomenon of
metrical incoherence, defined as co-existence of competing metrical systems of
stress representations in the same language. This phenomenon is investigated
using the data from several language families including Uralic (Nganasan,
Eastern Mari), Muskogean (Chickasaw), Northern Iroquoian (Cayuga, Seneca), and
other families (Tiberian Hebrew, Huariapano). The investigations focus on
structural properties of the competing metric stress representations as well
as their historical motivations. It was found that conflicting metrical
systems typically have common properties, such as their function (i.e., lower
and higher level of prominence) and diachronic origin. These findings are
discussed in terms of their theoretical consequences for metrical incoherence.

Chapter 2 (The Role of Phenomenal Accent, by B. Hyde) revolves around the
distinction between phenomenal accent and metrical accent and its role in
theories of musical rhythm as well as in linguistics. According to Hyde,
phenomenal stress is predicated by a salient acoustic contrast (e.g., higher
pitch) while metrical stress is simply a position of intersection in a
metrical organization and does not necessarily require an acoustic contrast.
It is argued that phonological and metrical stress patterns may not match,
which confounds a proper detection of metrical accents. Since many metrical
stress patterns are likely to go undetected, Hyde argues that single- or
dual-stress languages may “have a much richer pattern of metrical
organization” (p. 49) than previously recognized. Implications of this finding
for metrical accent patterns typology are discussed, and concrete suggestions
for future investigators are presented.

Chapter 3 (Foot Alignment in Spanish Secondary Stress, by E. Buckley) sheds
new light on the rhetorical patterns of Spanish secondary stress at both
lexical and phrasal levels. Exploiting the power of the lexical-phrasal
distinction, Buckley argues against Roca’s (1986) view of Spanish secondary
stress being present only lexically. Analyzing the colloquial and formal
patterns of Spanish stress, Buckley shows that the formal pattern is
right-aligned and lexical while the colloquial pattern tends to have trochaic
left-aligned feet with phrasal characteristics. The chapter discusses the
implications of this conclusion for the theory of metrical structure and
typology of stress, arguing that Spanish stress may not rely on gradient
directional alignment of feet. 

Chapter 4 (The Interaction of Metrical Structure and Tone in Standard Chinese,
by Y. Sui) explores the relationship between metrical representations of
stress and realizations of tones (i.e., High-level, Low-level, Rising,
Falling) in various syllable positions of Chinese words. Assuming a
generalized trochee system and word-initial stress in Standard Chinese, the
chapter presents a brief review of the metrical structure followed by the
discussion of the instances of toneless syllables, tone deletion, and tone
insertion.  The interaction between phonetic representations of tones and
stress is further investigated with regards to disyllabic, trisyllabic,
quadrisyllabic, and pentasyllabic words. Tones are shown to be dependent on
the metrical strength of a syllable, with possible reduction in non-head
metrical positions. Sui also points out that prominence judgements may fail to
reflect metrical structures correctly, which speaks against equating the
prominence patterns from native speaker judgements with metrical stress
representations. 

Chapter 5 (Prominence, Contrast, and the Functional Load Hypothesis: An
Acoustic Investigation, by I. Vogel, A. Athanasopoulou, and N. Pincus)
investigates “the overlap of acoustic properties used for prominence and for
phonemic contrasts in relation to … the Functional Load Hypothesis” (p. 123)
in four languages including Greek, Hungarian, Spanish, and Turkish. The
comparison of acoustic properties (i.e., duration and F0) expressing
prominence and contrasts across different languages at both the word and
sentence levels is the innovation of the study. The chapter presents a
thorough review of prominence and contrast properties, encompassing their
lexical characteristics and acoustic manifestations across the four languages.
A sound methodology generated results that support the Functional Load
Hypothesis with regard to prominence. Contrastive prominence-related acoustic
properties were found to be functionally heavy, which precluded their ability
to express prominence. Specific findings of distinct contrast manifestations
are discussed for each of the languages. 

Chapter 6 (Iquito: The Prosodic Colon and Evaluation of OT Stress Accounts, by
N. Topintzi) concludes the theme of stress representation by examining the
metrical system of Iquito. Topintzi argues for the existence of a prosodic
colon, an occurrence of two feet in a word, and for its integration in the
prosodic hierarchy. The evidence for the colon existence is reviewed both
within and beyond the Iquito language. The argument is further supported by
the results of three OT analyses of the Iquito data. The analyses were
selected on the basis of model type and stress theory. While all the three
approaches were found to capture degenerate feet emergence in Iquito, Harmonic
Serialism proved to be most effective. 

The second overarching theme of the book – stress acquisition by language
learners – is rolled out in Chapters 7 through 11. Chapter 7 (Investigating
the Efficiency of Parsing Strategies for the Gradual Learning Algorithm, by G.
Jarosz) compares the efficiency of several parsing strategies for the Gradual
Learning Algorithm in relation to the constraint-based Optimality Theory (OT)
and Harmonic Grammar (HG). Relying on existing literature, Jarosz shows that
performance of OT versus HG Gradual Learning Algorithms for constraint-based
learning models depends on parsing strategy. The chapter further investigates
the effects of three parsing strategies on end-state success and efficiency,
including Robust Interpretive Parsing (RIP), Resampling RIP (RRIP), and
Expected Interpretive Parsing (EIP). Based on the results, it is argued that
the latter two lead to substantially faster and more accurate learning models
for OT Gradual Learning Algorithms. 

Chapter 8 (Covert Representations, Contrast, and the Acquisition of Lexical
Accent, by B. E. Dresher) argues for the use of the parametric metrical
phonology model developed by Dresher and Kaye (1990) and later modified by
Dresher (1994) for learning stress systems with lexical accent. Elaborating on
the notion of metrical stress and its representation, Dresher identifies major
problems associated with the acquisition of the grammar of stress. Then
Dresher shows how Dresher and Kaye’s model with revised and elaborated lexical
representations can be used for learning the lexical stress system of a
constructed simple language inspired by Russian. Dresher also examines the
role of overt and covert stress structures in lexical accent acquisition.
Covert structures are judged to be fluid and dependent on learners’
proficiency in lexical stress. 

Chapter 9 (One or Many? In Search of the Default Stress in Greek, by A.
Revithiadou and A. Lengeris) explores whether native Greek speakers show a
preference for a certain stress pattern and how this preference relates to
morphological information. The authors review three lexical stress patterns of
Greek, namely antepenultimate, also called the phonological default,
penultimate, and ultimate, showing that all the three occur with most
morphological classes of words. To find out whether the choice of stress
patterns is morphology-dependent, two experiments were conducted that looked
into native listeners’ perceptions of stress with respect to different
morphological conditions. Stimuli with neutralized acoustic cues were used.
Participants’ stress judgements were found to be biased toward certain
morphological suffixes. The findings are discussed in terms of their
theoretical implications for morphological analyses of nouns and phonological
analyses of stress in modern Greek, as well as their practical significance
for the acquisition of constructed grammars. 

Chapter 10 (The Development of Rhythmic Preferences by Dutch-learning Infants,
by B. Keij and R. Kager) investigates stress preferences of infants at early
stages of Dutch learning and how these preferences relate to age. The
development of either strong-weak or weak-strong rhythmic patterns was
researched through eye tracking, using a central fixation auditory preference
procedure. The strong-weak stress pattern was favored at all ages, with the
strongest degree of preference occurring at the age of 6 and the weakest at 8.
Since Dutch stress arrangement is predominantly strong-weak, the authors are
reluctant to claim that the displayed strong-weak preferences are truly
language-specific. They urge future studies to look into stress pattern of
languages with a predominant weak-strong pattern. 

Chapter 11 (Acoustic Characteristics of Infant-directed Speech as a Function
of Prosodic Typology, by Y. Wang, A. Seihl, and A. Cristia) reviews existing
literature comparing acoustic properties of infant-directed speech (IDS) and
adult-directed speech (ADS) along both segmental and suprasegmental
dimensions. This comparison is carried out across typologically distinct
languages including stress languages, tone languages, and pitch-accented
languages. While both cross linguistic similarities and differences were
discovered, the findings generally “point to a tendency for IDS and ADS to be
distinct even across a diverse set of languages” (p. 323), particularly with
regard to the dimension of pitch. The authors reveal the need for future
investigations of the interactions between acoustic characteristics of IDS,
language typology, and other important factors, such as linguistic settings
and cultures.

EVALUATION

Dimensions of Phonological Stress has successfully achieved the goal of
unraveling stress as a multipolar, multidimensional phonological phenomenon.
It has accrued empirical evidence pertaining to interactions of various stress
dimensions. The volume’s thematic partition into Representation and
Acquisition has proved effective for the understanding of how accent patterns
are represented and learned in different languages. Although chapters are
separate studies and may occasionally present conflicting arguments, they seem
to constitute pieces of the same puzzle, contributing to the understanding of
phonological stress. That said, the volume would greatly benefit from having a
concluding chapter with a coherent in-depth synthesis of the included studies.
It would add value to the book by providing the reader with professional
guidance in the world of often-conflicting dimensions of phonological stress.
Currently, the duty of garnering and scrutinizing valuable pieces of
information sprinkled across the chapters rests largely with the reader.

REFERENCES

Hulst, H. G. van der (2014). Word stress: Theoretical and typological issues.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Roca, I. (1986). Secondary stress and metrical rhythm. Phonology yearbook 3,
341-370.

Dresher, B. E., & Kaye J. D. (1990). A computational learning model for
metrical phonology. Cognition, 34, 137-195.

Dresher, B. E. (1994). Acquiring stress systems. In E. S. Ristad (ed.),
Language computations (pp. 71-92). Providence, RI: AMS.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Roman Lesnov is a doctoral student in Applied Linguistics at Northern Arizona
University. His specialization is second language listening assessment, second
language testing, and statistical methods for applied linguistics. Roman is
also interested in researching the relationship between pronunciation
production and second language listening comprehension.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-29-472	
----------------------------------------------------------






More information about the LINGUIST mailing list