Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-dgq2d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-11T18:38:39.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Higher pitch in BT is not universal: acoustic evidence from Quiche Mayan*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Nan Bernstein Ratner  and
Clifton Pye
Nan Bernstein Ratner
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Clifton Pye
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although higher pitch has been described as a universal feature of babytalk (BT) registers worldwide, analysis of a sample of three Quiche Mayan-speaking mothers addressing their infant children indicated that their BT register does not utilize this feature. Quiche mothers either make no pitch distinction in speech to young children, or actually lower pitch slightly in comparison with their Adult–Adult interaction style. A comparison group of American mothers raised pitch 35–70 Hz when addressing infants of the same age and language maturity. We posit that pitch-raising strategies may be sociolinguistically determined and may serve different functions across languages.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , October 1984 , pp. 515 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

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

Bernstein, N. & Jeje, S. (1978). Higher pitch in babytalk: are these Trix just for kids? Paper presented at the Third Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.Google Scholar
Bernstein Ratner, N. (1984). Patterns of vowel modification in mother–child speech. JChLang 11. 515–22.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1977). Introduction. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Bunzel, R. (1959). Chichicastenango: a Guatemalan village. Publications of the American Ethnological Society, 12. Seattle: University of Washington.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1977). Baby talk as a simplified register. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Garnica, O. K. (1974). Some characteristics of prosodic input to young children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford Universitya.Google Scholar
Garnica, O. K. (1977). Some prosodic and paralinguistic features of speech to young children. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Kearsley, R. (1973). The newborn's response to auditory stimulation: a demonstration of orienting and defensive behavior. ChDev 44. 582–90.Google ScholarPubMed
Lieberman, P., Ryalls, J. H. & Rabson, S. (1982). On the early imitation of intonation and vowels. Paper presented at the Seventh Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.Google Scholar
Maxwell, J. M. (1982). Wach' Yalxi(‘It was well spoken’): the Chuj (Mayan) taxonomy of language use and its evaluation. Paper presented at 81st Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
Pye, C. (1980). The acquisition of grammatical morphemes in Quiche Mayan. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Pye, C.(MS). Mayan motherese: an ethnography of Quiche Mayan speech to young children.Google Scholar
Sachs, J. (1977). The adaptive significance of linguistic input to prelinguistic infants. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Stern, D. N., Spieker, S., Barnett, R. K. & MacKain, K. (1983). The prosody of maternal speech: infant age and context related changes. JChLang 10. 1–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Vogt, E. Z. (1969). Zinacantan: a Mayan community in the highlands of Chiapas. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar