A comparative analysis of English nuclear stress principles in conversation

IF 0.2 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Kent Lee
{"title":"A comparative analysis of English nuclear stress principles in conversation","authors":"Kent Lee","doi":"10.2478/topling-2023-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Nuclear stress (or sentence stress) as a prosodic feature marks information flow in spoken English, and has received some treatment in the linguistics literature, most notably in pragmatics, but less so in newer phonological paradigms. Current theories in linguistics might shed light on this feature, such as Optimality Theory (OT) and cognitive grammar (CG). This paper compares potential insights and likely predictions of these two approaches for nuclear stress, by examining a recorded conversation of native US English speakers. The descriptive statistics indicate stress pattern distributions as expected, and some stress tokens show particular pragmatic and discourse functions of nuclear stress. The OT framework can better explain the interaction of different levels of prosody, grammar, and information structure, while CG might offer a more holistic explanation of stress, and its sociopragmatic and discourse functions, and may thus be likely more applicable to discourse studies, applied linguistics, and pedagogy. Implications are discussed for a CG theory of prosodic phonology, and for L2 pedagogy.","PeriodicalId":41377,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2023-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Nuclear stress (or sentence stress) as a prosodic feature marks information flow in spoken English, and has received some treatment in the linguistics literature, most notably in pragmatics, but less so in newer phonological paradigms. Current theories in linguistics might shed light on this feature, such as Optimality Theory (OT) and cognitive grammar (CG). This paper compares potential insights and likely predictions of these two approaches for nuclear stress, by examining a recorded conversation of native US English speakers. The descriptive statistics indicate stress pattern distributions as expected, and some stress tokens show particular pragmatic and discourse functions of nuclear stress. The OT framework can better explain the interaction of different levels of prosody, grammar, and information structure, while CG might offer a more holistic explanation of stress, and its sociopragmatic and discourse functions, and may thus be likely more applicable to discourse studies, applied linguistics, and pedagogy. Implications are discussed for a CG theory of prosodic phonology, and for L2 pedagogy.
英语会话中核心重音原则的比较分析
摘要核重音(或句子重音)作为一种韵律特征,标志着英语口语中的信息流动,在语言学文献中得到了一些处理,尤其是在语用学中,但在较新的语音范式中则不那么重视。目前语言学中的一些理论,如最优性理论(OT)和认知语法(CG),都可能揭示这一特征。本文通过研究以美国英语为母语的人的对话录音,比较了这两种方法对核压力的潜在见解和可能的预测。描述性统计数据表明,重音模式的分布符合预期,一些重音表征显示了核重音特有的语用和话语功能。OT框架可以更好地解释不同层次的韵律、语法和信息结构的相互作用,而CG可能对压力及其社会语用和话语功能提供更全面的解释,因此可能更适用于话语研究、应用语言学和教育学。讨论了韵律音韵学CG理论和二语教学法的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Topics in Linguistics
Topics in Linguistics LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
26 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信