Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


International Journal of Romance Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Wetzels, W. Leo

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.435
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.830

CiteScore 2018: 0.85

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.255
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.668

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 28, Issue 2


Inter-speaker variation, Optimality theory, and the prosody of clitic left-dislocations in Spanish

Ingo Feldhausen
  • Corresponding author
  • Institut für Romanische Sprachen und Literaturen, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Norbert-Wollheim-Platz 1, D-60629 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-08-24 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2015-0005


This paper presents an empirical study on the prosody of clitic left-dislocations (CLLDs) in Spanish and offers new perspectives on how the phenomenon of inter-speaker variation in linguistic data can be integrated into formal grammatical theory. Results from a production experiment based on scripted speech show that CLLDs have an obligatory left and right boundary (typically a high edge tone at the intermediate phrase level), while other sentence-internal boundaries are subject to inter-speaker variation. The hypothesis presented here suggests that prosodic boundaries which mark information structural (IS) categories are more necessary than boundaries which satisfy alignment constraints; only the latter can show inter-speaker variation (IS-over-Alignment Hypothesis). A modified version of the Stochastic Optimality Theory (SOT) is proposed to account for the attested inter-speaker variation. By assuming that the degree of constraint overlap can vary between individual speakers while the underlying hierarchy remains invariant, the modified version of SOT is applicable beyond variation in the output structure of a whole population.

Keywords: clitic left-dislocation; Spanish; prosodic phrasing; inter-speaker variation; Stochastic Optimality Theory


  • Aguilar, Lourdes, Carme de la Mota & Pilar Prieto. 2009. Sp_ToBI Training Materials. http://prosodia.upf.edu/sp_tobi/en/ (accessed June, 2014).

  • Astruc, Lluїsa. 2005. The intonation of extra-sentential elements in Catalan and English. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Avanzi, Mathieu. 2012. L’Interface Prosodie: Syntaxe en Français : Dislocations, Incises et Asyndètes. Bruxelles: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

  • Beas, Omar. 2007. Agreement on the left edge: The syntax of left dislocation in Spanish. California: University of Southern California dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Bocci, Giuliano. 2007. Criterial positions and left periphery in Italian. Nanzan Linguistics 3(1). 35–70.Google Scholar

  • Bocci, Giuliano. 2013. The syntax–prosody interface. A cartographic perspective with evidence from Italian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Boersma, Paul & Bruce Hayes. 2001. Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 32(1). 45–86.Google Scholar

  • Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2014. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. http://www.praat.org/ (accessed June 2014).

  • Bosque, Ignacio & Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach. 2009. Fundamentos de Sintaxis Formal. Madrid: Akal.Google Scholar

  • Bresnan, Joan, Ashwini Deo & Devyani Sharma. 2007. Typology in variation: a probabilistic approach to be and n‘t in the Survey of English Dialects. English Language and Linguistics 11(2). 301–346.Google Scholar

  • Butcher, Andrew. 1981. Aspects of the speech pause: Phonetic correlates and communicative functions. AIPUK 15. Kiel: IPdS.Google Scholar

  • Casielles-Suárez, Eugenia. 2003. Left-dislocated structures in Spanish. Hispania 86(2). 326–338.Google Scholar

  • Cinque, Guglielmo. 1983. ‘Topic’ constructions in some European languages and ‘Connectedness’. In Konrad Ehlich & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Connectedness in sentence, discourse and text, 93–118. Tilburg: KBU.Google Scholar

  • Clifton, Charles, Katy Carlson & Lyn Frazier. 2002. Informative prosodic boundaries. Language and Speech 45(2). 87–114.Google Scholar

  • Contreras, Helen. 1976. A theory of word order with special reference to Spanish. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

  • D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Gorka Elordieta, Sónia Frota, Pilar Prieto & Marina Vigário. 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance. In Sónia Frota, Marina Vigário & Marla J. Freitas (eds.), Prosodies: With special reference to Iberian languages, 59–97. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Delais-Roussarie, Elisabeth, Jenny Doetjes & Petra Sleeman. 2004. Dislocations in French. In Francis Corblin & Henriette de Swart (eds.), Handbook of French Semantics, 501–528. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar

  • Delais-Roussarie, Elisabeth & Ingo Feldhausen. 2014. Variation in prosodic boundary strength in French. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 7. Dublin, 1052–1056.

  • Delattre, Pierre. 1965. Comparing the phonetic features of English, French, German and Spanish. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar

  • Domínguez, Laura. 2004. Mapping focus: The syntax and prosody of focus in Spanish. Boston: Boston University dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Downing, Laura. 2011. The prosody of “dislocation” in selected Bantu languages. Lingua 121(5): 772–786.Google Scholar

  • Elordieta, Gorka, Sónia Frota & Marina Vigário. 2005. Subjects, objects and intonational phrasing in Spanish and Portuguese. Studia Linguistica 59(2–3). 110–143.Google Scholar

  • Escudero, David, Lourdes Aguilar, Maria del Mar Vanrell & Pilar Prieto. 2012. Analysis of inter-transcriber consistency in the Cat_ToBI prosodic labelling system. Speech Communication 54(4). 566–582.Google Scholar

  • Estebas-Vilaplana, Eva & Pilar Prieto. 2010. Castilian Spanish intonation. In Pilar Prieto & Paolo Roseano, 17–48.

  • Fant, Lars. 1984. Estructura informativa en enspañol: Estudio sintáctico y entonativo. Göteborg: Uppsala.Google Scholar

  • Feldhausen, Ingo. 2010. Sentential form and prosodic structure of Catalan. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Feldhausen, Ingo. 2011. The prosodic phrasing of sentential objects. Lingua 121(13). 1934–1964.Google Scholar

  • Feldhausen, Ingo. 2014a. Intonation and preverbal subjects in Italian. Proceedings of the 10th International Seminar on Speech Production, Köln, 118–121.

  • Feldhausen, Ingo. 2014b. The intonation of left-dislocations in Spanish and other Romance languages. Frankfurt am Main: Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main habilitation thesis.Google Scholar

  • Feldhausen, Ingo. 2016. The relation between prosody and syntax: The case of different types of left-dislocations in Spanish. In Meghan Armstrong, Nicholas Henriksen & Maria del Mar Vanrell (eds.), Intonational grammar in Ibero-Romance, 153–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Feldhausen, Ingo, Christoph Gabriel & Andrea Pešková. 2010. Prosodic phrasing in Argentinean Spanish: Buenos Aires and Neuquén. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 5, Chicago, IL.

  • Féry, Caroline. 2004. Gradient prosodic correlates of phrasing in French. In Trudel Meisenburg & Maria Selig (eds.), Nouveaux départs en phonologie, 161–182. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar

  • Féry, Caroline. 2011. German sentence accents and embedded prosodic phrases. Lingua 121(13). 1906–1922.Google Scholar

  • Féry, Caroline, Robin Hörnig & Serge Pahaut. 2011. Correlates of phrasing in French and German from an experiment with semi-spontaneous speech. In Christoph Gabriel & Conxita Lleó (eds.), Intonational phrasing in Romance and Germanic, 11–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Féry, Caroline & Fabian Schubö. 2011. Hierarchical prosodic structures in the intonation of center-embedded relative clauses. The Linguistic Review 27(3). 293–317.Google Scholar

  • Frascarelli, Mara. 2000. The syntax-phonology interface in focus and topic constructions in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

  • Frazier, Lyn, Katy Carlson & Charles Clifton, JR. 2006. Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Science 10(6). 244–249.Google Scholar

  • Frota, Sónia. 2000. Prosody and focus in European Portuguese: Phonological phrasing and intonation. New York, NY: Garland.Google Scholar

  • Frota, Sónia, Mariapaola D’Imperio, Gorka Elordieta, Pilar Prieto & Marina Vigário. 2007. The Phonetics and phonology of intonational phrasing in Romance. In Pilar Prieto, Joan Mascaró & Maria-Josep Solé (eds.), Segmental and prosodic issues in Romance phonology, 131–153. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Gili Fivela, Barbara. 1999. The prosody of left-dislocated topic constituents in Italian read speech. Proceedings of Eurospeech 6, Budapest, 531–534.

  • Grabe, Esther. 2002. Variation adds to prosodic typology. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 1, Aix-en-Provence, 127–132.

  • Gussenhoven, Carlos & Rietveld, Toni. 1992. Intonation contours, prosodic structure and preboundary lengthening. Journal of Phonetics 20(3). 283–303.Google Scholar

  • Hellmuth, Sam. 2014. Disjunction at prosodic boundaries. Talk presented at Cambridge Linguistics Society, University of Cambridge, 30th October 2014.

  • Hualde, José I. 2002. Intonation in Spanish and the other Ibero-Romance languages: Overview and status quaestionis. In Carolin Wiltshire & Joaquim Camps (eds.), Romance phonology and variation, 101–115. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Hualde, José I. 2005. The sounds of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hualde, José I. & Pilar Prieto. 2015. Intonational variation in Spanish: European and American varieties. In Sónia Frota & Pilar Prieto (eds.), Intonational variation in Romance, 350–391. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.). 2014. Prosodic typlogy II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Kirchner, Robert. 2002. Preliminary thoughts on “phonologisation” within an exemplar-based speech processing model. UCLA Working Papers 6.

  • Ladd, Robert. 1988. Declination ‘reset’ and the hierarchical organization of utterances. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84(2). 530–544.Google Scholar

  • Ladd, Robert. 2008. Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • López, Luis. 2009. A derivational syntax for information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • López-Cortina, Jorge. 2007. The Spanish left periphery: Questions and answers. Washington, DC: Georgetown University dissertation.Google Scholar

  • McCarthy, John & Alan Prince. 1993. Generalized alignment. In Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1993, 79–153. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

  • Myrberg, Sara. 2013. Sisterhood in prosodic branching. Phonology 30(1). 73–124.Google Scholar

  • Niebuhr, Oliver, Mariapaola D’Imperio, Barbara Gili Fivela & Francesco Cangemi. 2011. Are there “shapers” and “aligners”? Individual differences in signalling pitch accent category. Proceedings of the 17th ICPhS, Hong Kong, 120–123.

  • Patin, Cédric, Ingo Feldhausen & Elisabeth Delais-Roussarie. Structure prosodique et dislocation à gauche dans les langues romanes et bantu: vers une approche typologique unifiée en OT. In Éva Buchi, Jean-Paul Chauveau & Jean-Marie Pierrel (eds.). Actes du XXVIIe Congrès international de linguistique et de philologie romanes. Strasbourg: Société de linguistique. https://www.academia.edu/5495293/Structure_prosodique_et_dislocation_%C3%A0_gauche_dans_les_langues_romanes_et_bantu_engl._Prosodic_Structure_and_Clitic_Left-Dislocations_in_Romance_and_Bantu_Languages_

  • Pešková, Andrea. 2015. Sujetos pronominales en el español porteño: Implicaciones pragmáticas en la interfaz sintáctico-fonológica. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Peters, Benno, Klaus Kohler & Thomas Wesener. 2005. Phonetische Merkmale prosodischer Phrasierung in deutscher Spontansprache. In Klaus Kohler, Felicitas Kleber & Benno Peters (eds.), Prosodic structures in German spontaneous speech, 143–184. Kiel: IPdS.Google Scholar

  • Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Pierrehumbert, Janet. 2001. Stochastic phonology. Glot International 5(6). 195–207.Google Scholar

  • Pitrelli, John F. Mary E. Beckman & Julia Hirschberg. 1994. Evaluation of prosodic transcription labeling reliability in the ToBI framework. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Yokohama, 123–126.

  • Post, Brechtje. 2000. Tonal and phrasal structures in French intonation. The Hague: Thesus.Google Scholar

  • Price, Patti, Mari Ostendorf, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel & Cynthia Fong. 1991. The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90(6). 2956–2970.Google Scholar

  • Prieto, Pilar. 2006. Phonological phrasing in Spanish. In Sonia Colina & Fernando Martínez-Gil (eds.), Optimality-theoretic advances in Spanish phonology, 39–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Prieto, Pilar & Paolo Roseano (eds.). 2010. Transcription of intonation of the Spanish language. München: Lincom.Google Scholar

  • Prieto, Pilar, Maria del Mar Vanrell, Lluїsa Astruc, Elinor Payne & Brechtje Post. 2012. Phonotactic and phrasal properties of speech rhythm. Speech Communication 54(6). 681–702.Google Scholar

  • Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 1993/2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar (Technical Report Nr. 2). Rutgers University [Published 2004 by Blackwell, Oxford].

  • Rao, Rajiv. 2008. Observations on the roles of prosody and syntax in the phonological phrasing of Barcelona Spanish. The Linguistics Journal 3(3). 85–131.Google Scholar

  • Rivero, María-Luisa. 1980. On left-dislocation and topicalization in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry 11(2). 363–393.Google Scholar

  • Rossi, Mario. 1999. L‘Intonation, le Système du Français - Description et Modélisation. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1995. The prosodic structure of function words. In James Morgan & Katherine Demuth (eds.), Signal to syntax, 187–214. Mahwah, NJ: L.E. Associates.Google Scholar

  • Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2011. The syntax-phonology interface. In John Goldsmith, Jason Riggle & Alan Yu (eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 2nd edn, 435–484. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1984. Topicalización y Pragmática en Español. Revista Española de Lingüística 14(1). 1–20.Google Scholar

  • Suñer, Margarita. 2006. Left dislocations with and without epithets. Probus 18(1). 127–158.Google Scholar

  • Trouvain, Jürgen. 2004. Tempo variation in speech production: Implications for speech synthesis. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 30(2). 219–255.Google Scholar

  • Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2002. Upstep and embedded register levels. Phonology 19(1). 77–120.Google Scholar

  • Vaissière, Jacqueline. 1983. Language-independent prosodic features. In Anne Cutler & Robert D. Ladd (eds.), Prosody: Models and measurements, 53–65. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Villalba, Xavier. 2009. The syntax and semantics of dislocations in Catalan. Köln: Lambert Academic Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Vizcaíno Ortega, Francisco, Mercedes Cabrera Abreu, Eva Estebas-Vilaplana & Lluїsa Astruc. 2008. The phonological representation of edge tones in Spanish alternative questions. Language Design 56(2). 31–38.Google Scholar

  • Wightman, Colin, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, Mari Ostendorf & Patti Price. 1992. Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 91(3). 1707–1717.Google Scholar

  • Yoon, Tae-Jin, Jennifer Cole & Mark Hasegawa-Johnson. 2007. On the edge: acoustic cues to layered prosodic domains. Proceedings of the 16th ICPhS, Saarbrücken, 1264–1267.

  • Zubizarreta, Maria L. 1998. Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-08-24

Published in Print: 2016-09-01

This work was supported by the French Investissements d’Avenir – Labex EFL program (ANR-10-LABX-0083).

Citation Information: Probus, Volume 28, Issue 2, Pages 293–333, ISSN (Online) 1613-4079, ISSN (Print) 0921-4771, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2015-0005.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in