Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T20:07:43.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Polysyllabic units in the vocalizations of children from 0 ; 6 to 1 ; 11: Intonation-groups, tones and rhythms*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2007

DAVID SNOW
DAVID SNOW*
Affiliation:
Purdue University
*
Address for correspondence: Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Purdue University, 500 Oval Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. Tel: +1-765-494-3824. Fax: +1-765-494-0771. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous studies have suggested that intonation development in infants and toddlers reflects an interaction between physiological and linguistic influences. The immediate background research for this study, however, was based on vocalizations that were only one syllable in length. By extending the analysis to polysyllabic utterances, the present study evaluated a broader range of physiological constraints on intonation production than the maximally simple context of monosyllabic utterances had permitted. The width and direction of pitch change across one- and two-syllable nuclear tones were acoustically analyzed in utterances produced by 60 children between the ages of 0 ; 6 and 1 ; 11. The results showed that the children controlled the characteristic intonation pattern of English monosyllables by the age of 1 ; 6–1 ; 8. However, even the youngest groups of children produced relatively robust and adult-like intonation contours when the tone-bearing string was polysyllabic, suggesting that the trochaic or dactylic foot is the natural ‘unmarked’ unit of tone production. The asymmetrical results for one- versus two-syllable tones support the conclusion that width of pitch change largely reflects physiological universals in children's earliest vocalizations and language-specific learning after the age of 1 ; 6. Implications of the findings are also discussed in relation to the Trochaic Template Hypothesis. It is concluded that a bias for trochaic rhythms that some children demonstrate could be based, in part, on the child's sensitivity to physiological constraints on the velocity and range of intonational pitch change.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , November 2007 , pp. 765 - 797
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, G. D. (1983). Some suprasegmental contours in French two-year-old children's speech. Phonetica 40, 269–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, G. D. & Hawkins, S. (1980). Phonological rhythm: Definition and development. In Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Child phonology. Vol. 1: Production, 227–56. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, M. (1978). A study of two English nuclear tones. Language and Speech 21, 326–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atkinson, J. E. (1978). Correlation analysis of the physiological factors controlling fundamental voice frequency. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 63, 211–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balog, H. L. & Roberts, F. D. (2004). Perception of utterance relatedness during the first-word-period. Journal of Child Language 31, 837–54.Google Scholar
Best, C., Levitt, A. & McRoberts, G. (1991). Examination of language-specific influences in infants'; discrimination of prosodic categories. Actes du XIIème Congrès International des Sciences Phonétiques, 162–5. Aix-en-Provence, France: Université de Provence, Service des Publications.Google Scholar
Bever, T. G., Fodor, J. A. & Weksel, W. (1971). Theoretical notes on the acquisition of syntax: A critique of ‘contextual generalization’. In Bar-Adon, A. & Leopold, W. F. (eds), Child language: A book of readings, 263–78. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1986). Intonation and its parts: Melody in spoken English. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Branigan, G. (1979). Some reasons why successive single-word utterances are not. Journal of Child Language 6, 411–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, E. M. & Ward, W. D. (1982). Intervals, scales, and tuning. In Deutsch, D. (ed.), The psychology of music, 241–69. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, W. E. & Sorensen, J. M. (1981). Fundamental frequency in sentence production. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1981). Falls and rises: Meanings and universals. Journal of Linguistics 17, 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1997). Intonation, 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1991). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, 3rd ed.Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
D'Odorico, L. & Franco, F. (1991). Selective production of vocalization types in different communication contexts. Journal of Child Language 18, 475–99.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Thal, D., Bates, E., Hartung, J. P., Pethick, S. & Reilly, J. S. (1993). MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: User's Guide and Technical Manual. San Diego: San Diego State University.Google Scholar
Gerken, L. A. (1994). A metrical template account of children's weak syllable omissions from multisyllabic words. Journal of Child Language 21, 565–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hallé, P. A., Boysson-Bardies, B. de & Vihman, M. M. (1991). Beginnings of prosodic organization: Intonation and duration patterns of disyllables produced by Japanese and French infants. Language and Speech 34, 299–318.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D. & Murray, A. D. (1982). Acoustic features of infant vocalic utterances at 3, 6, and 9 months. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 72, 353–65.Google Scholar
Leopold, W. F. (1947). Speech development of a bilingual child: A linguist's record, Vol. II: Sound-learning in the first two years. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Lieberman, P. (1967). Intonation, perception, and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Locke, J. L. (1983). Phonological acquisition and change. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Milenkovic, P. & Read, C. (1992). CSpeech Version 4. Madison: Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Ohala, J. J. & Ewan, W. (1973). Speed of pitch change (abstract). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 53, 345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1972). On the ‘constant total-amplitude’ theory of final syllable lengthening. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 51, 102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1980). The emergence of the sounds of speech in infancy. In Yeni-Komshian, G., Kavanagh, J. F. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Child phonology: Vol. 1. Production, 93–112. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (1979). The perception of fundamental frequency declination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 66, 363–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, J. (1981). Synthesizing intonation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 70, 985–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, M. (1978). Interactions of intensity glides and frequency glissandos. Language and Speech 21, 384–96.Google Scholar
Snow, D. (1998 a). Prosodic markers of syntactic boundaries in the speech of four-year-old children with normal and disordered language development. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 41, 1158–70.Google Scholar
Snow, D. (1998 b). A prominence account of syllable reduction in early speech development: The child's prosodic phonology of tiger and giraffe. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 41, 1171–84.Google Scholar
Snow, D. (2002). Intonation in the monosyllabic utterances of one-year-olds. Infant Behavior and Development 24, 393–407.Google Scholar
Snow, D. (2004). Falling intonation in the one- and two-syllable vocalizations of infants and preschoolers. Journal of Phonetics 32, 373–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, D. (2006). Regression and reorganization of intonation from 6 to 23 months. Child Development 77, 281–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, D. & Balog, H. L. (2002). Do children produce the melody before the words? A review of developmental intonation research. Lingua 112, 1025–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, R. E., Bernstein, L. E. & Demorest, M. E. (1993). Vocal communication in the first 18 months of life. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 36, 548–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stoel-Gammon, C. (1989). Prespeech and early speech development of two late talkers. First Language 9, 207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundberg, J. (1979). Maximum speed of pitch changes in singers and untrained subjects. Journal of Phonetics 7, 71–9.Google Scholar
't Hart, J., Collier, R. & Cohen, A. (1990). A perceptual study of intonation: An experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderslice, R. & Ladefoged, P. (1972). Binary suprasegmental features and transformational word-accentuation rules. Language 48, 819–38.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., DePaolis, R. A. & Davis, B. D. (1998). Is there a ‘trochaic bias’ in early word learning? Evidence from infant production in English and French. Child Development 69, 935–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, B. & Local, J. (1993). The sense of an ending: a case of prosodic delay. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 7, 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, D. H., Levitt, A. G. & Wang, Q. (1991). Intonational differences between the reduplicative babbling of French- and English-learning infants. Journal of Child Language, 18, 501–516.Google Scholar
Winkworth, A. L., Davis, P. J., Ellis, E. & Adams, R. D. (1994). Variability and consistency in speech breathing during reading: Lung volumes, speech intensity, and linguistic function. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 37, 535–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zemlin, W. R. (1968). Speech and hearing science: Anatomy and physiology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar