To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The results of a production experiment show that English speakers distinguish elements under contrastive focus from elements that are merely new in the discourse. A novel paradigm eliciting both contrastively focused and merely discourse-new elements in the same sentence avoids differences in information structure and pitch accenting in the context surrounding the target elements that were confounds in previous studies on the topic. Elements under contrastive focus show greater duration, relative intensity, and F0 movement with respect to other elements in the utterance than elements that are new in the discourse but not under contrastive focus. We argue that the phonetic differences revealed here cannot be explained in terms of systematic manipulation of pitch-accent type or phrasal boundaries, and should instead be analyzed as differences in phrase-level phonological prominence for contrastively focused and merely discourse-new elements.
A model of speech production is proposed in which the input is a planning stage at which lexical items are arrayed, accompanied by the full panoply of phonological representations from distinctive features to their attendant tree structures. A set of instructions for control of the vocal tract is calculated leading to a sound output. Two parallel processes are involved in the calculation of these instructions, both of which replace the planning-stage representation by the appropriate motoric instructions. One of these processes is universal and involves replacing each distinctive feature with an appropriate set of motoric instructions, either unmodified or modified by the process of overlap. We postulate a parallel language-specific process that is sensitive to those features in danger of losing their perceptual saliency as a consequence of the environment in which they appear. This process, referred to as enhancement, adds additional motoric instructions to enhance the saliency of the jeopardized features. We provide a number of examples to illustrate how enhancement works. We conclude from these examples that whereas defining gestures related to distinctive features are, in many instances, weakened or even absented from the speech stream, enhancement gestures, once added to the set of motoric instructions, appear never to be subject to obliteration by overlap.