Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 37 items :

  • "prominence effects" x
Clear All

children are very closely attuned to the frequency patterns of prosodic structure in the input language and are aware of their specific distributions across the lexicon. Keywords: coda acquisition, syllabic structure, frequency effects, prominence effects Joan Borràs-Comes: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Departament de Traducció i Ciències del Llenguatge, Barcelona, Spain. E-mail: joan.borras@upf.edu Pilar Prieto: Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Departament de Traducció i Ciències del Llenguatge, Barcelona, Spain. E

of vowel duration or other vowel parameters to the reported prominence effects, or, whether consonant duration may also be a significant factor in shaping the stress category. Studying the Ukrainian metrical system is also important from the theoretical perspective. According to Łukaszewicz and Mołczanow (2018a, b), the intricacies of the Ukrainian system – more specifically, the interaction between free lexical stress and edge-based iterating subsidiary stress – potentially make it an excellent testing ground for competing metrical theories. Ukrainian is reported

.1016/0010-0277(82)90033-6 Slobin Dan I. Bever Thomas G 1982 Children use canonical sentence schema: A crosslinguistic study of word order and inflections Cognition 12 229 265 Song, Hyon-joo & Cynthia Fisher. 2005. Who is “she”? Discourse prominence influences preschoolers’ comprehension of pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language 52. 29–57. 10.1016/j.jml.2004.06.012 Song Hyon-joo Fisher Cynthia 2005 Who is “she”? Discourse prominence influences preschoolers’ comprehension of pronouns Journal of Memory and Language 52 29 57 Song, Hyon-joo & Cynthia Fisher. 2007. Discourse prominence effects on

(1). 123–147. Fromkin, V. A. 1971. The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language 47. 27–52. Fougeron, Cécile & Patricia A. Keating. 1997. Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 101(6). 3728–3740. Hualde, José Ignacio, Miquel Simonet & Marianna Nadeu. 2011. Consonant lenition and phonological recategorization. Laboratory Phonology 2(1). 301–329. Jacewicz, Eva, Robert A. Fox & Joseph Salmons. 2006. Prosodic prominence effects on vowels in chain shifts. Language Variation and Change 18(3). 285

) Extended Animacy Hierarchy First/Second person pronoun > Third person pronoun > Proper name > Human common noun > Nonhuman animate common noun > Inanimate common noun ( Croft 2003 : 130) (3) The Semantic Role Hierarchy Agent > Benefactive > Recipient/Experiencer > Instrument > Theme/Patient > Location ( Bresnan and Kanerva 1989 : 23) Accounts of word order variation in terms of prominence hierarchies are based on findings showing that more prominent phrases tend to precede less prominent phrases. Since the seminal work of Bock and Warren (1985) , prominence effects on

languages. (33) Align (Pphr R, Low R) Align the right edge of a phonological phrase with a low tone. Thus, the prominence effects of both the left and right edge are relevant for phonological phrasing in Bemba. In relating these phonological constraints to syntax we must capture the fact that the relevant left edge that phonology refers to in (31) coincides with a CP in syntax. To achieve this end we can specify the general constraint of Selkirk (1995) in (34) to a more specific constraint that refers to CPs as in (35). (34) a. Align-XP, R For each XP there is a

. Stressed syllables show positional prominence effects. (i) Consonant-, vowel-, and tone oppositions are greater on stressed syllables. (ii) Segments are strengthened in stressed syllables (e.g., Cs become aspirated or geminated, Vs become lengthened, diphthongized). c. Unstressed syllables show positional non-prominence effects. (i) Consonant-, vowel-, and tone oppositions are fewer on un- stressed syllables. (ii) Segments are weakened in unstressed syllables (e.g., Cs be- come lenited, Vs become reduced). d. Stress shows cyclic effects (including non-echo secondary

, adapted from Haspelmath and Karjus 2017 ] a. Basic zero-marked form with singular meaning Tag ‘day’ b. Plural-marked form Tag-e day- pl ‘day’ Multiplex/uniplex prominence effects are connected with the fact that nouns may have inherent number preferences, which are reflected through coding asymmetries of the type exemplified above, as well as through frequency distributions of patterns of number marking in corpora. For an account of these phenomena in the light of a general theory of markedness in grammar, see Tiersma (1981) . A third type of lexico-semantic effects

. Westbury, & Kiyoshi Honda. 1998. Vowel posture normalization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 104(4). 2426–2437. Hillenbrand, James, Laura A. Getty, Michael J. Clark, & Kimberlee Wheeler. 1995. Acoustic char- acteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97(5). 3099–3111. Jacewicz, Ewa. 1999. Phonological context in the acquisition of second language vowels. Univer- sity of Wisconsin-Madison PhD thesis. Jacewicz, Ewa, Robert A. Fox, & Joseph Salmons. 2006. Prosodic prominence effects on vowels in chain shifts. Language