Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T10:02:30.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The intonation of the Icelandic other-initiated repair expressions Ha ‘Huh’ and Hvað segirðu/Hvað sagðirðu ‘What do/did you say’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Nicole Dehé
Nicole Dehé*
Affiliation:
Universität Konstanz, Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, 78457 Konstanz, Germany. [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

It has been shown in the literature that cross-linguistically, the other-initiated repair element ‘huh’ is typically realised with rising intonation. Icelandic has exceptional status in this respect in that it has falling intonation with Ha [haː] ‘huh’. The literature claims that it is language-specific interrogative prosody that accounts for this exceptional status of Icelandic. More specifically, it argues that falling intonation is the default for questions in Icelandic and that the other-initiated repair interjection shares its intonational features with interrogatives. The aim of this paper is twofold. First, using map-task data, it confirms previous results for the intonation of Icelandic Ha, and in addition shows that its more complex relative Hvað segirðu/Hvað sagðirðu ‘What do/did you say?’ is realised with falling intonation as well. Both expressions are realised with an H* pitch accent followed by downward pitch movement to L%. Secondly, the paper argues, for a number of reasons, against the assumption that question prosody is enough to account for the Icelandic pattern, and it suggests instead that Ha and Hvað segirðu/Hvað sagðirðu are in fact not specifically marked in intonation, but are realised with a combination of pitch accent and boundary tone found across utterance types in Icelandic.

Keywords

Icelandicinterrogative prosodyintonationother-initiated repair expressionsquestion prosodyrepair
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 38 , Special Issue 2: Prosody in the Nordic Languages , October 2015 , pp. 189 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © Published by Nordic Journal of Linguistics 2015 

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

Anderson, Anne [H.], Brown, Gillian, Shillcock, Richard & Yule, George. 1984. Teaching Talk: Strategies for Production and Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Anne H., Bader, Miles, Bard, Ellen G., Boyle, Elizabeth, Doherty, Gwyneth, Garrod, Simon, Isard, Stephen, Kowtko, Jacqueline, McAllister, Jan, Miller, Jim, Sotillo, Catherine, Thompson, Henry S. & Weinert, Regine. 1991. The Hcrc map task corpus. Language and Speech 34 (4), 351–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 1985. Icelandic word stress and metrical phonology. Studia Linguistica 39 (2), 93–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 1987. The stress of prefixes and suffixes in Icelandic. In Gregersen, Kirsten & Basbøll, Hans (eds.), Nordic Prosody IV, 137–146. Odense: Odense University Press.Google Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 1994–95. Tilraun til greiningar á íslensku tónfalli. Íslenskt mál 16–17, 99–131.Google Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 1998. Toward an analysis of Icelandic intonation. In Werner, Stefan (ed.), Nordic Prosody: Proceedings of the VIIth Conference, Joensuu 1996, 49–62. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 2005. Hljóð. Handbók um hljóðfræði og hljóðkerfisfræði. Íslensk tunga, 1. Bindi. Reykjavík: Almenna Bókafélagið.Google Scholar
Árnason, Kristján. 2011. The Phonology of Icelandic and Faroese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Christine. 1999. The Intonation of English Statements and Questions: A Compositional Interpretation. New York & London: Garland.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul. 2001. Praat: A system for doing phonetics by computer. GLOT International 5 (9–10), 341–345.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & Weenink, David. 2012. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [computer program]. Version 5.3.04; http://www.praat.org/.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1978. Intonation across languages. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.), Universals of Human Language, 471–524. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1989. Intonation and its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapallaz, M. 1964. Notes on the intonation of questions in Italian. In Abercrombie, David (ed.), In Honour of Daniel Jones: Papers Contributed on the Occasion of his Eightieth Birthday, 12 September 1961, 306–312. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Chen, Aoju, Gussenhoven, Carlos & Rietveld, Toni. 2004. Language-specificity in perception of paralinguistic intonational meaning. Language and Speech 47 (4), 311–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Imperio, Mariapaola. 2002. Italian intonation: An overview and some questions. Probus 14 (1), 37–69.Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole. 2009. An intonational grammar for Icelandic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 32 (1), 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehé, Nicole. 2010. The nature and use of Icelandic prenuclear and nuclear pitch accents: Evidence from f0 alignment and syllable/segment duration. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 33 (1), 31–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delais-Roussarie, Elisabeth, Post, Brechtje, Avanzi, Mathieu, Buthke, Carolin, Di Cristo, Albert, Feldhausen, Ingo, Jun, Sun-Ah, Martin, Philippe, Meisenburg, Trudel, Rialland, Annie, Sichel-Bazin, Rafèu & Yoo, Hiyon. 2015. Intonational phonology of French: Developing a ToBI system for French. In Frota & Prieto (eds.), 63–100.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark, Torreira, Francisco & Enfield, N. J.. 2013. Is “Huh?” a universal word? Conversational infrastructure and the convergent evolution of linguistic items. PLOS ONE 8 (11), e78273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark, Blythe, Joe & Dirksmeyer, Tyko. 2014. Formats for other-initiation of repair across languages: An exercise in pragmatic typology. Studies in Language 38 (1), 5–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1997. ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 28 (1), 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einarsson, Stefán. 1973. Icelandic: Grammar, Texts, Glossary, 2nd edn.Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Dingemanse, Mark, Baranova, Julija, Blythe, Joe, Brown, Penelope, Dirksmeyer, Tyko, Drew, Paul, Floyd, Simeon, Gipper, Sonja, Gísladóttir, Rósa S., Hoymann, Gertie, Kendrick, Kobin H., Levinson, Stephen C., Magyari, Lilla, Manrique, Elizabeth, Rossi, Giovanni, Roque, Lila San & Torreira, Francisco. 2013. Huh? What? – a first survey in twenty-one languages. In Hayashi, Makoto, Raymond, Geoffrey & Sidnell, Jack (eds.), Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, 343–380. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fletcher, Janet & Stirling, Lesley. 2014. Prosody and discourse in the Australian map task corpus. In Durand, Jacques, Gut, Ulrike & Kristoffersen, Gjert (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology, 562–755. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frota, Sónia & Prieto, Pilar (eds.). 2015. Intonation in Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gili-Fivela, Barbara, Avesani, Cinzia, Barone, Marco, Boci, Giuliano, Crocco, Claudia, D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Giordano, Rosa, Marotta, Giovanna, Savino, Michelina & Sorianello, Patrizia. 2015. Intonational phonology of the regional varieties of Italian. In Frota & Prieto (eds.), 140–197.Google Scholar
Gisladottir, Rosa S. 2015. Other-initiated repair in Icelandic. Open Linguistics 1, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, Martine & Baumann, Stefan. 2002. Deutsche Intonation und GToBI. Linguistische Berichte 191, 267–298.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine, Baumann, Stefan & Benzmüller, Ralf. 2005. German intonation in autosegmental-metrical phonology. In Sun-Ah, Jun (ed.), Prosodic Typology, 55–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos & Chen, Aoju. 2000. Universal and language-specific effects in the perception of question intonation. Presented at the Sixth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, ICSLP 2000/INTERSPEECH 2000, Beijing, China, 16–20 October 2000.Google Scholar
Hedberg, Nancy & Sosa, Juan Manuel. 2002. The prosody of questions in natural discourse. The First International Conference on Speech Prosody (Speech Prosody 2002), Aix-en-Provence, France. http://sprosig.isle.illinois.edu/sp2002/papers.htm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helgason, Pétur. 2006. SMTC – a Swedish map task corpus. In Ambrazaitis, Gilbert & Schötz, Susanne (eds.), FONETIK 2006 (Working Papers 52), 57–60. Lund: Centre for Languages & Literature, Deptartment of Linguistics & Phonetics, Lund University.Google Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio & Prieto, Pilar. 2015. Intonational variation in Spanish: European and American varieties. In Frota & Prieto (eds.), 350–391.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Sebastian & Baumann, Stefan. 2013. Satzmodus und die Diskurspartikel hm: Intonation und Interpretation. Linguistische Berichte 236, 473–496.Google Scholar
Leed, Richard L. 1965. A contrastive analysis of Russian and English intonation contours. The Slavic and East European Journal 9 (1), 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Gerald, Wallis, Sean & Aarts, Bas. 2002. Exploring Natural Language: Working with the British Component of the International Corpus of English (Varieties of English Around the World G29). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohala, John J. 1983. Cross-language use of pitch: An ethological view. Phonetica 40 (1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrone, Caterina & Niebuhr, Oliver. 2014. On the intonation of German intonation questions: The role of the prenuclear region. Language and Speech 57 (1), 108–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rialland, Annie, Ridouane, Rachid & Kassan, Clémentine. 2009. A physiological investigation of voice quality in Kabiye assertions and yes/no questions. Presented at the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics, Cologne 2009.Google Scholar
Savino, Michelina. 2012. The intonation of polar questions in Italian: Where is the rise? Journal of the International Phonetic Association 42 (1), 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1997. Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes 23 (3), 499–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Jefferson, Gail & Sacks, Harvey. 1977. The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53 (2), 361–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schubiger, Maria. 1958. English Intonation: Its Form and Function. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Sosa, Juan Manuel. 2003. Wh-questions in Spanish: Meanings and configuration variability. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 2, 229–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1994. Icelandic. In König, Ekkehard & van der Auwera, Johan (eds.), The Germanic Languages, 142–189. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Heuven, Vincent J. & Haan, Judith. 2002. Temporal distribution of interrogativity markers in Dutch: A perceptual study. In Gussenhoven, Carlos & Warner, Natasha (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology 7, 61–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanrell, Maria del Mar & Soriano, Olga Fernández. 2014. Dialectal variation at the prosody–syntax interface: Evidence from Catalan and Spanish interrogatives. In Campbell, Nick, Gibbon, Dafydd & Hirst, Daniel (eds.), Speech Prosody 7, Dublin, 20–23 May 2014, 698–702.Google Scholar
Wichmann, Anne. 2011. Grammaticalization and prosody. In Narrog, Heiko & Heine, Bernd (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, 331–341. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar