Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T21:47:08.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Caroline Féry (2017). Intonation and prosodic structure. (Key Topics in Phonology.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. xi + 374.

Review products

Caroline Féry (2017). Intonation and prosodic structure. (Key Topics in Phonology.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. xi + 374.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2019

Jason Bishop
Jason Bishop*
Affiliation:
City University of New York
*
*E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Phonology , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , February 2019 , pp. 171 - 179
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

I thank Caroline Féry, Martine Grice and Sun-Ah Jun for helpful comments and discussion (this does not imply their agreement with all commentary contained in this review). Thanks also to Boram Kim for typographical assistance in preparing the review.

References

REFERENCES

Beckman, Mary E. (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Beckman, Mary E. & Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook 3. 255–309.Google Scholar
Bishop, Jason (2013). Prenuclear accentuation in English: phonetics, phonology, and information structure. PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight (1965). Forms of English: accent, morpheme, order. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel (2016). Intonation and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Sasha (2012). The theme/rheme distinction: accent type or relative prominence? JPh 40. 329–349.Google 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, Sónia & Prieto, Pilar (eds.) Intonation in Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 63–100.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline (2010). The intonation of Indian languages: an areal phenomenon. In Hasnain, S. Imtiaz & Chaudhury, Shreesh (eds.) Problematizing language studies: cultural, theoretical and applied perspectives. Essays in honor of Ramakant Agnihotri. New Delhi: Aakar Books. 292–316.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline & Kügler, Frank (2008). Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. JPh 36. 680–703.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline, Pandey, Pramod & Kentner, Gerrit (2016). The prosody of focus and givenness in Hindi and Indian English. Studies in Language 40. 302–339.Google Scholar
Frota, Sónia (2000). Prosody and focus in European Portuguese: phonological phrasing and intonation. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Frota, Sónia (2012). Prosodic structure, constituents and their implementation. In Cohn, Abigail C., Fougeron, Cécile & Huffman, Marie K. (eds.) The Oxford handbook of laboratory phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 255–265.Google Scholar
Grabe, Esther (1998). Comparative intonational phonology: English and German. PhD dissertation, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Grabe, Esther, Post, Brechtje, Nolan, Francis & Farrar, Kimberley (2000). Pitch accent realisation in four varieties of British English. JPh 28. 161–185.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine (1995). Leading tones and downstep in English. Phonology 12. 183–233.Google Scholar
Grice, Martine, Ladd, D. Robert & Arvaniti, Amalia (2000). On the place of phrase accents in intonational phonology. Phonology 17. 143–185.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos (1999). On the limits of focus projection in English. In Bosch, Peter & van der Sandt, Rob (eds.) Focus: linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 43–55.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos (2005). Transcription of Dutch intonation. In Jun (2005c). 118–145.Google Scholar
Ito, Junko & Mester, Armin (2013). Prosodic subcategories in Japanese. Lingua 124. 20–40.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (1998). The Accentual Phrase in the Korean prosodic hierarchy. Phonology 15. 189–226.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (2005a). Korean intonational phonology and prosodic transcription. In Jun (2005c). 201–229.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (2005b). Prosodic typology. In Jun (2005c). 430–458.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.) (2005c). Prosodic typology: the phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (2014a). Prosodic typology: by prominence type, word prosody, and macro-rhythm. In Jun (2014b). 520–539.Google Scholar
Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.) (2014b). Prosodic typology II: the phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen M. (1990). Toward a typology of postlexical rules. In Inkelas, Sharon & Zec, Draga (eds.) The phonology–syntax connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 127–143.Google Scholar
Kentner, Gerrit & Féry, Caroline (2013). A new approach to prosodic grouping. The Linguistic Review 30. 277–311.Google Scholar
Khan, Sameer ud Dowla (2014). The intonational phonology of Bangladeshi Standard Bengali. In Jun (2014b). 81–117.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert (1988). Declination ‘reset’ and the hierarchical organization of utterances. JASA 84. 530–544.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert (1990). Metrical representation of pitch register. In Kingston, John & Beckman, Mary E. (eds.) Papers in laboratory phonology I: between the grammar and physics of speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 35–57.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert (2008). Intonational phonology. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark & Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (1984). Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length. In Aronoff, Mark & Oehrle, Richard T. (eds.) Language sound structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 157–233.Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Vogel, Irene (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Ohl, Claudia K. & Pfitzinger, Hartmut R. (2009). Compression and truncation revisited. Proceedings of Interspeech 2009. 2451–2454. Available (November 2018) at https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/archive_papers/interspeech_2009/papers/i09_2451.pdf.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger (1999). Givenness, AvoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural Language Semantics 7. 141–177.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth (1981). On the nature of phonological representation. In Myers, Terry, Laver, John & Anderson, John (eds.) The cognitive representation of speech. Amsterdam: North-Holland. 379–388.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3. 371–405.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth (1996). The prosodic structure of function words. In Morgan, James L. & Demuth, Katherine (eds.) Signal to syntax: bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 187–213.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert (1995). Phonological phrases: their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert (1999). On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. LI 30. 219–255.Google Scholar