Cover not available
Part of
Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 16: Papers from the 2017 Budapest Conference
Edited by Veronika Hegedűs and Irene Vogel
[Approaches to Hungarian 16] 2020
► pp. 187–206

Fixed stress as phonological redundancy

Effects on production and perception in Hungarian and other languages

 | University of Delaware
From the perspective of word prosody, fixed stress languages such as Hungarian may seem rather uninteresting: stress, by definition, always falls on the same position in a word. This paper examines the acoustic properties of Hungarian stress based on a large, systematically collected, corpus and considers them in relation to issues of redundancy in speech production and in speech perception (stress deafness). The Hungarian findings also serve as the basis of comparison for languages with other types of stress systems, analysed with the same methods: Turkish, Arabic and Spanish. It is demonstrated that stress predictability affects both speech production and perception, and also that its effect may be mitigated by exceptions in otherwise predictable stress languages.
Keywords: stress, redundancy, stress perception, stress production, stress deafness
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Stress systems and redundancy
    • 2.1Overview of stress systems
    • 2.2Redundancy and predictable stress
    • 2.3Predictable stress: Perception and production
      • 2.3.1Stress perception
      • 2.3.2Production
  • 3.Experimental design: Stress production and analysis
    • 3.1Experimental design
      • 3.1.1Hypotheses
      • 3.1.2Procedure
    • 3.2Stimuli
    • 3.3Analyses
  • 4.Results: Stress properties in Hungarian, and comparison with other languages
  • 5.Discussion: Effects of predictability and exceptions on the production and perception of stress
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 8 April 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.16.09vog
References (22)
References
Altmann, H. 2006. The perception and production of second language stress: A cross-linguistic experimental study. PhD Dissertation. University of Delaware.
Aylett, M. & A. Turk. 2004. The smooth signal redundancy hypothesis: A functional explanation for relationships between redundancy, prosodic prominence, and duration in spontaneous speech. Language and Speech 47(1). 31–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasopoulou, A., I. Vogel & H. Dolatian. 2017. Acoustic properties of canonical and non-canonical stress in French, Turkish, Armenian and Brazilian Portuguese. Proceedings of Interspeech 2017. Stockholm, Sweden. DOI logo
Domahs, U., R. Wiese, I. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, & M. Schlesewsky. 2008. The processing of German word stress: Evidence for the prosodic hierarchy. Phonology 25. 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Domahs, U., S. Genc, J. Knaus, R. Wiese & B. Kabak. 2012a. Processing (un-) predictable word stress: ERP evidence from Turkish. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(3). 335–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Domahs, U., J. Knaus, P. Orzechowska & R. Wiese. 2012b. Stress “deafness” in a language with fixed word stress: An ERP study on Polish. Frontiers in Psychology 3. 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Domahs, U., J. Knaus, H. El Shanawany & R. Wiese. 2014. The role of predictability and structure in word stress processing: An ERP study on Cairene Arabic and a cross-linguistic comparison. Frontiers in Psychology 5. 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, E., N. Sebastián-Gallés, E. Navarrete & S. Peperkamp. 2008. Persistent stress “deafness”: The case of French learners of Spanish. Cognition 106. 682–706. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, E., S. Peperkamp, & N. Sebastián-Galles. 2001. A robust method to study stress “deafness.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 110. 1606–1618. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, E., C. Pallier, N. Sebastian, & J. Mehler.1997. A destressing “deafness” in French? Journal of Memory and Language 36. 406–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kabak, B., & I. Vogel. 2001. The phonological word and stress assignment in Turkish. Phonology 18. 315–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knaus, J., & U. Domahs. 2009. Experimental evidence for optimal and minimal metrical structure of German word prosody. Lingua 119: 1396–1413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knaus, J., R. Wiese & U. Janssen. 2007. The processing of word stress: EEG studies on task related components. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 709–712. Saarbrücken.
Peperkamp, S. & E. Dupoux. 2002. A typological study of stress “deafness”. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (eds.), Laboratory Phonology, 203–240. Berlin: de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Peperkamp, S., I. Vendelin & E. Dupoux. 2010. Perception of predictable stress: A cross-linguistic investigation. Journal of Phonetics 38. 422–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt-Kassow, M., K. Rothermich, M. Schwartze & S. Kotz. 2011. Did you get the beat? Late proficient French-German learners extract strong-weak patterns in tonal but not in linguistic sequences. Neuroimage 54. 568–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turk, A. 2010. Does prosodic constituency signal relative predictability? A smooth signal redundancy hypothesis. Laboratory Phonology 1(2). 227–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, R. 2017. The role of predictability in intonational variability. Language and Speech 60. 123–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogel, I., A. Athanasopoulou & N. Pincus. 2015. Acoustic properties of prominence in Hungarian and the functional load hypothesis. In É. Dékány, K. É. Kiss & B. Surányi (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian. 14, 267–292. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Prominence, contrast and the functional load hypothesis: An acoustic investigation. In R. Goedemans, J. Heinz & H. van der Hulst (eds.), Dimensions of phonological stress, 123–167. Cambridge: University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Acoustic properties of prominence and foot structure in Arabic. In H. Ouali (ed.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXIX. Papers from the Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 2015, 55–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., J. Arnold & M. Tanenhaus. 2008. Tic tac toe: Effects of predictability and importance on acoustic prominence in language production. Cognition 106. 1548–1557. DOI logoGoogle Scholar