Towards a model of intonational phonology of Turkish: Neutral intonation (original) (raw)
Related papers
Intonation in the grammar of Turkish
Lingua, 2010
We claim that the observed word order variations, information structure and the phrasal intonational structure correlate with each other in Turkish, rather than determine one way or the other. Therefore the relation must be mediated. Turkish prosody imposes precedence constraints on certain intonational contours that are responsible for the realization of information structural units, and the lexical syntactic types are reflections of these constraints on grammar, which must include directionality, syntactic types of boundary tones as lexical items, and presyntactic type projection of pitch accents to words in a string. What we then get is one lexicalized grammar mediating the correlation for all kinds of constituencies and compositional meanings, reflecting the phonological, syntactic, semantic and prosodic nature of the constraints on possible lexical categories. We describe an inventory of Turkish tunes and intonation patterns, along with their syntactic types and compositional semantics, and provide an account of systematicity in intonation and information structure using Steedman's theory of syntax-phonology interface. The argument is backed by intonational analysis of recorded speech data. #
ON THE ROLE OF PROSODIC CONSTITUENCY IN TURKISH
The aim of this paper is to discuss the factors operating on the sentence melodic structure of Turkish declaratives. Constraints that apply to Turkish intonation phrases will be discussed with respect to two aspects: (i) information structure, (ii) word order restrictions.
INTONATION IN TURKISH KABARDIAN
2007
This paper reports on intonational characteristics of the Northwest Caucasian language Kabardian as spoken by the diaspora community of Turkey. As the first instrumental study of intonation in a Northwest Caucasian language, the current research expands our typological database on intonation systems. Drawing on a combination of conversational and elicited data, several findings emerged. Both statements and most question types, including yes/no and wh-questions, are associated with falling intonation. Terminal rises are found in certain questions and non-final items in a list. H* pitch accents occur in both statements and questions, while H* on a non-wh NP in questions is followed by a HL fall. *
This paper claims that certain syntactic structures and information structural content are not always directly encoded in the prosodic representation of Turkish utterances. That syntax is mirrored rather limitedly in prosody is observed in isolated parentheticals which are prosodically realized identically to syntactically integrated constituents such as subjects and objects. That information structure has a limited effect on F0 variation is evidenced in utterances containing multiple foci; they display the same F0 pattern as all-new utterances or utterances with narrow focus. Thus, neither the informative status (topic/focus/neutral) nor the syntactic status (sentential/extra-sentential) of a constituent licenses a pre-specified phonetic correlate for focus and topic in Turkish. To explain the relationship between information structure and prosody in Turkish, one requires an account that appeals to the alignment of relevant items to certain prosodic positions at the level of the Phonological Phrase. In this article, general characteristics of the prosodic units within a Turkish Intonation Phrase are described. An information structure-free inventory of a Turkish Intonation Phrase is developed. This study concludes that what intonation languages such as English and German convey with pitchaccent placement is conveyed through prosodic phrasing strategies and boundary tone placement in Turkish, which is a characteristic of 'phrase languages'. tonlarının düzenlenmesi ile işaretlendiği görülmüştür, ki bu bürünsel 'öbek dillerinin' belirgin bir özelligi olarak değerlendirilir.
Intonation and focus marking in Western Armenian
2022
We document the prosodic characteristics and intonation of Western Armenian, an understudied Indo-European language. Primary stress is generally associated with the right most syllable that has a full non-schwa vowel. We elicited and annotated pitch contours with the autosegmental-metrical and ToBi frameworks. For declarative sentences, we analyze three types of focus: broad focus, object focus, and subject focus. In an SOV sentence, broad focus triggers a word-final H* tone in each element except the final V. These sentences have an L% tone on the rightmost boundary of the intonational phrase. For object and subject focus, Western Armenian uses a sharp rise on the narrow focused constituent, frequently followed by post-focal deaccenting. For interrogatives, we elicited wh-questions, yes-no (polar) questions, multiple wh-questions. For polar questions, the question is marked with a final rise H% on the last syllable of the intonational phrase. If the polar question is asked for a specific syntactic constituent (i.e., narrow focus) then the pitch rise is detected on that constituent followed by a high-plateau and a L% tone. In wh-questions, however, the sentence includes a wh-word with a nuclear stress, followed by post-focal compression and then a final H% tone. For multiple wh-questions, while acoustically two of the wh-words have a rise, the pitch of the first wh-word is significantly higher than that of the second. These questions have H% at the intonational phrase.
Phonological Divergences and Convergences: A Comparative Study of Italian and Turkish Sound Systems
2023
This study presents a comparative analysis of the phonological systems of Italian and Turkish, focusing on their divergences and convergences. Despite both languages belonging to distinct language families—Romance and Turkic—their sound systems exhibit notable parallels and contrasts. Through an in-depth examination of phonemic inventories, vowel harmony, consonantal patterns, and prosodic features, this paper explores the ways in which Italian and Turkish phonology interact and diverge across key structural domains. The research highlights how these differences shape speech patterns, accentuation, and intonation in both languages. By providing a contrastive framework, the study offers insights into the phonological characteristics that define each language, while also uncovering universal tendencies in cross-linguistic phonological systems. This analysis not only enriches the understanding of Italian and Turkish phonology but also contributes to broader theoretical discussions on language typology and phonological theory, particularly in cross-linguistic studies.