Cover not available
Part of
Studies on Variation in Portuguese
Edited by Pilar Barbosa, Maria da Conceição de Paiva and Celeste Rodrigues
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 14] 2017
► pp. 81–110

Chapter 3
Building a prosodic profile of European Portuguese varieties

The challenge of mapping intonation and rhythm

 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
 | University of Lisbon, Portugal
In the present paper we explore a methodology to map prosodic variation in Portuguese, namely intonation and rhythm, which goes beyond the traditional approaches used to represent segmental, lexical or syntactic variation. To find the most adequate mapping method for intonation and rhythm, we tested spatial interaction models for the representation of nuclear contours, and spatial interpolation methods for rhythmic distinctions across varieties. Our results show a non-contiguous distribution of prosodic features, thus not matching the regional areas previously defined on the basis of segmental, lexical or syntactic variation. These results, together with those of previous studies across varieties of other languages, provide growing evidence that the distribution of prosodic features tends to be independent of geography, unlike non-prosodic variation.
Keywords: prosodic variation, intonation, rhythm, probabilistic geographical mapping, European Portuguese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The challenge of mapping
    • 2.1Mapping linguistic variation
    • 2.2Models of spatial interaction and interpolation: an innovative proposal to map variation
  • 3.Mapping linguistic variation in European Portuguese
  • 4.Materials
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Intonation
    • 5.2Rhythm
  • 6.Building a prosodic profile of European Portuguese varieties
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 2 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.14.03cru
References (69)
References
Barros, N., & Frota, S. (2015). Prosodic phrasing in parentheticals and topics across varieties of European Portuguese. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2015). Glasgow, Scotland (UK). Available at <[URL]<
Beckman, M. E., & Pierrehumbert, J. (1986). Japanese prosodic phrasing and intonation synthesis. Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 173–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2007). Praat – Doing Phonetics by Computer. (Version 5.2). Available from <[URL]<
Burrough, P. A., & McDonnell, R. A. (1998). Principles of geographic information systems. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Carrilho, E., & Pereira. S. (2011). Sobre a distribuição geográfica de construções sintácticas não-padrão em Português Europeu. In A. Costa, I. Falé, & P. Barbosa (Eds.) Textos seleccionados do XXVI Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 125–139). CD-ROM. Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
Carrilho, E., & Pereira, S. (2012). Aires dialectales en Portugais Européen et syntaxe dialectal. In X. A. Álvarez Pérez, E. Carrilho, & C. Magro (Eds.) (2012). Proceedings of the international symposium on limits and areas in dialectology (LimiAr). Lisbon, 2011. Lisboa: Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. K., & Trudgill, P. (1998). Dialectology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chasco, C. (1997). Modelos de determinación de áreas de mercado del comercio al por menor. Tesina. Facultad de CC. Económicas y Empresariales. (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid).Google Scholar
Chorley, R., & Haggett, P. (1967). Models in geography. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Cintra, L. (1971). Nova proposta de classificação dos dialectos galego-portugueses. Boletim de Filologia, 22, 81–116. Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Filológicos.Google Scholar
Cliquet, G. (2006). Geomarketing: Methods and strategies in spatial marketing (GIS – Geographical Information Systems Series). France: Wiley-ISTE.Google Scholar
Cruz, M. (2013). Prosodic variation in European Portuguese: Phrasing, intonation and rhythm in central-southern varieties. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Lisbon.Google Scholar
Cruz, M., & Frota, S. (2011). Prosódia dos tipos frásicos em variedades do Português Europeu: Produção e percepção. In A. Costa, I. Falé, & P. Barbosa (Eds.), Textos seleccionados do XXVI Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 208–225). Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
(2014). Rhythm in central-southern varieties of European Portuguese: Production and perception. In A. Moreno, F. Silva, I. Falé, I. Pereira, & J. Veloso (Eds.), Textos selecionados do XXIX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 213–230). Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
ESRI Environmental Systems Resource Institute) (2009). ArcMap 10.2. [software]. Redlands CA: Environmental Systems Resource. Available from <[URL]>
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2010). Data collection methods in speech act performance: DCTs, role plays, and verbal reports. In E. Usó Juán & A. Martinéz-Flor (Eds.), Speech act performance: Theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues (pp. 41–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fotheringham, A. S. (1983). A new set of spatial interaction models: The theory of competing destinations. Environment and Planning A, 15(1), 15–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fotheringham, A. S., & O’Kelly, M. E. (1989). Spatial interaction models: Formulations and applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Frota, S. (2000). Prosody and focus in European Portuguese: Phonological phrasing and intonation. New York, NY: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
(2002). Nuclear falls and rises in European Portuguese: A phonological analysis of declarative and question intonation. Probus, 14, 113–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). The intonational phonology of European Portuguese. In S.-A. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic typology II (pp. 6–42). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S., & Cruz, M. (Coord.). (2012–2015). InAPoP – Interactive Atlas of the Prosody of Portuguese Webplatform. Available at <[URL]>
Frota, S., & Vigário, M. (2000). Aspectos de prosódia comparada: Ritmo e entoação no PE e no PB. In V. R. Castro & P. Barbosa (Eds.), Actas do XV Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística, (Vol. 1, pp. 533–555). Coimbra: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
(2001). On the correlates of rhythmic distinctions: The European/Brazilian Portuguese case. Probus, 13, 247–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Intonational phrasing in two varieties of European Portuguese. In T. Riad & C. Gussenhoven (Eds.), Tones and tunes (Vol. 1, pp. 263–289). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Frota, S., Vigário, M., & Martins, F. (2002a). Language discrimination and rhythm classes: Evidence from Portuguese. Speech Prosody Proceedings (pp. 315–318). Aix-en-Provence.Google Scholar
(2002b). Discriminação entre línguas: Evidência para classes rítmicas. In A. Gonçalves, & C. N. Correia, Actas do XVII Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística, (pp. 189–199). Lisboa: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística; Colibri.Google Scholar
Frota, S., Vigário, M., Galves, C., Gonzalez-Lopez, V., & Abaurre, B. (2012). The phonology of rhythm from Classical to Modern Portuguese. Journal of Historical Linguistics, 2(2), 173–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S., Cruz, M., Fernandes-Svartman, F., Collischonn, G., Fonseca, A., Serra, C., Oliveira, P., & Vigário, M. (2015). Intonational variation in Portuguese: European and Brazilian varieties. In S. Frota & P. Prieto (Eds.), Intonation in Romance (pp. 235–283). Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S., Oliveira, P., Cruz, M., & Vigário, M. (2015). P-ToBI: tools for the transcription of Portuguese prosody. Lisboa: Laboratório de Fonética, CLUL/FLUL. Retrieved from <[URL]<
Goebl, H. (1997). Some dendrographic classifications of the data of CLAE 1 and CLAE 2. In W. Viereck & H. Ramisch (Eds.), Computer developed Linguistic Atlas of England (CLAE) (Vol. II, pp. 23–32). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
(2006). Recent advances in Salzburg dialectometry. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 21, 411–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). A bunch of dialectometrical flowers: A brief introduction to dialectometry. In U. Smit, S. Dollinger, J. Hüttner, G. Kaltenböck, & U. Lutzky (Eds.) Tracing English through time: Explorations in language variation (Austrian Studies in English 95) (pp. 133–171). Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller Universitäts Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, C. (2004). The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haynes K., & Fotheringham, A. (1984). Gravity and spatial interaction models. Berverly Hills CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. (1981). Statistical models for discrete panel data. In C. F. Manski & D. McFadden (Eds.), Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heeringa, W. (2004). Measuring dialect pronunciation differences using Levenshtein Distance. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Available at <[URL]>
Heeringa, W., Nerbonne, J., & Kleiweg, P. (2002). Validating dialect comparison methods. In W. Gaul & G. Ritter (Eds.), Classification, automation, and new media. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, University of Passau (pp. 445–452). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Huff, D. L. (1963). A Probabilistic analysis of consumer spatial behaviour. In W. S. Decker (Ed.), Emerging concepts in marketing (pp. 443–461). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. (2012). In defense of prosodic typology: A response to Beckman & Venditti. Linguistic Typology, 16, 341–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnston, K., Ver Hoef, J. M., Krivoruchko, K., & Lucas, N. (2001). Using ArcGis Geostatistical Analyst. Environmental Systems Resource Institute. <[URL]>
Jun, S.-A. (Ed.). (2005). Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(Ed.). (2014). Prosodic typology II: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessler, B. (1995). Computational dialectology in Irish Gaelic. In Proceedings of the 7th conference of the European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 60–67). Dublin: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. (2008). Intonational phonology (2nd ed). Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, G. (1983). The use of random-utility theory in building location-allocation models. In J. F. Thisse & H. Zoller (Eds.), Locational, analysis of public facilities (pp. 357–383). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Lobo, M. (2008). Variação morfo-sintáctica em dialectos do Português Europeu: O gerúndio flexionado. Diacrítica, 22(1), 25–55.Google Scholar
Magro, C. (2007). Clíticos: Variações sobre o tema (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Maguire, W., & McMahon, A. (2011). Quantifying relations between dialects. In W. Maguire & A. McMahon (Eds.), Analysing variation in English (pp. 93–120). Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mairano, P. (2009). Correlatore version 2.1. Laboratory of Experimental Phonetics ‘Arturo Genre’, University of Turin. Available at <[URL]>
Martins, A. M. (2003). Variação e mudança em Português. In Câmara Municipal de Cascais (Org.) A língua portuguesa: Actas dos IX cursos internacionais de verão de Cascais – 2002 (pp. 29–44). Cascais: Câmara Municipal de Cascais; Instituto de Estudos Sociais.Google Scholar
McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–143). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1977). Modelling the choice of residential location (Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers, Papers 477, pp. 1–33). New Haven, CT: Yale University, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics.Google Scholar
Nerbonne, J. (2003). Linguistic variation and computation. In Proceedings of the 10th meeting of the European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 3–10), April.
Nerbonne, J., Heeringa, W., & Kleiweg, P. (1999). Edit distance and dialect proximity. In D. Sankoff & J. Kruskal (Eds.), Time warps, string edits and macromolecules: The theory and practice of sequence comparison (pp. 5–15). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Paulino, N., Oliveira, P., & Vigário, M. (In press). Hiatus resolution across words in European Portuguese dialects. In M. Cruz, P. Oliveira, & S. Frota (Eds.), Prosodic variation (with)in languages: Intonation, phrasing and segments. Series Studies in Phonetics and Phonology, edited by M. J. Ball and P. van Lieshout. United Kingdom: Equinox Publishing.
Pereira, S. (2003). A concordância com a gente à luz da morfologia distributiva. In A. Mendes, & T. Freitas, Textos seleccionados do XVIII Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística (pp. 653–662). Porto: Associação Portuguesa de Linguística.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). MIT.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J., & Beckman, M. E. (1988). Japanese tone structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ramus, F., Nespor, M., & Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73(3), 265–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reilly, W. J. (1931). The law of retail gravitation. New York, NY: W. J. Reilly Inc.Google Scholar
Rocha, J., & Morgado, P. (2007). A complexidade em geografia. In Geophilia – O sentir e os sentidos da geografia (pp. 137–153). Lisboa: Centro de Estudos Geográficos.Google Scholar
Savino, M. (2012). The intonation of polar questions in Italian: Where is the rise? Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 42(1), 23–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segura, L., & Saramago, J. (2001). Variedades dialectais portuguesas. In M. H. M. Mateus (Ed.), Caminhos do Português: Exposição comemorativa do ano europeu das línguas (pp. 221–237). Lisboa: Biblioteca Nacional.Google Scholar
Séguy, J. (1973). La dialectométrie dans l’atlas linguistique de la Gascogne. Revue de Linguistique Romane, 37, 1–24.Google Scholar
Tardiff, T. J. (1979). Definition of alternatives and representation of dynamic behaviour in spatial choice models. Transportation Research Record, 723, 25–30.Google Scholar
Turk, A., Nakai, S., & Sugahara, M. (2006). Acoustic segment durations in prosodic research: A practical guide. In S. Sudhoff, D. Lenertova, R. Meyer, S. Pappert, P. Augurzky, I. Mleinek, … & J. Schliesser (Eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 1–28). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viaplana, J. (2002). Dialectologia (2nd edition). València: Universitat de València.Google Scholar
Vigário, M., & Frota, S. (2003). The intonation of Standard and Northern European Portuguese: A comparative intonational phonology approach. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 2(2) 115–137. [Special issue on Portuguese Phonology, edited by L. Wetzels].Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Gabriel, Christoph, Jonas Grünke & Elena Kireva
2020. Chapter 15. Portuguese remnants in the Spanish of Olivenza (Extremadura). In Spanish Phonetics and Phonology in Contact [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 28], ► pp. 421 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.