Article published in:
Segmental, prosodic and fluency features in phonetic learner corpora
Edited by Jürgen Trouvain, Frank Zimmerer, Bernd Möbius, Mária Gósy and Anne Bonneau
[International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 3:2] 2017
► pp. 250277


Abercrombie, D.
1991Fifty Years in Phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, K.
2004 “Can German intonation be taught?”. In R. Annas (Ed.), Deutsch als Herausforderung: Fremdsprachenunterricht und Literatur in Forschung und Lehre. Stellenbosch: Sun, 89–95.Google Scholar
Armstrong, L., & Ward, I. C.
1926Handbook of English Intonation. Cambridge: Heffner.Google Scholar
Batliner, A.
1991 “Ein einfaches Modell der Frageintonation und seine Folgen”. In E. Klein, F. P. Duteil, & K. H. Wagner (Eds.), Betriebslinguistik und Linguistikbetrieb. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 147–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baumann, S., Grice, M., & Steindamm, S.
2006 “Prosodic marking of focus domains – Categorical or gradient?”. In R. Hoffmann, & H. Mixdorff (Eds), Speech Prosody: 3rd International Conference, Dresden, May 2–5, 2006. Abstract Book and CD-ROM Proceedings. Dresden: TUDpress, 301–304.Google Scholar
Baumann, S., Niebuhr, O., & Schroeter, B. 2016 “Acoustic cues to perceived prominence levels – Evidence from German spontaneous speech”. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 8, Boston, 2016, 1–5.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. L.
1958 “A theory of pitch accent in English”. Word 14, 109–149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, M. E., & Pierrehumbert, J.
1986 “Intonational structure in English and Japanese”. Phonology Yearbook III, 15–70.Google Scholar
Boren, M., & Ramey, J.
2000 “Thinking aloud: Reconciling theory and practice”. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 43(3), 261–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Breen, M., Dilley, L. C., Kraemer, J., & Gibson, E.
2012 “Inter-transcriber reliability for two systems of prosodic annotation: ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) and RaP (Rhythm and Pitch)”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8(2), 277–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Caspers, J., & van Heuven, V.
1993 “Effects of time pressure on the phonetic realization of the Dutch accent-lending pitch rise and fall”. Phonetica 50, 161–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D.
1995The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
Delattre, P.
1966 “Les dix intonations de base du français”. The French Review 40, 1–14.Google Scholar
Essen, Otto von
1956Grundzüge der hochdeutschen Satzintonation. Ratingen: Henn.Google Scholar
Fagyal, Z.
1997 “Chanting intonation in French”. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4, 77–90.Google Scholar
Feldes, S., & Herzog, M.
1997 “Kategorisierung des Lautkontextes von deutschen Allophonen für die phonembasierte Erkennung”. Fortschritte der Akustik 23, 551–552.Google Scholar
Fónagy, I., & Magdics, K.
1963 “Emotional patterns in intonation and music”. Zeitschrift für Phonetik und Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 16, 293–326.Google Scholar
Fujimori, A., Yoshimura, N., & Yamane, N.
2015The Development of Visual CALL Materials for Learning L2 English Prosody. Paper presented at ICT for Language Learning , 12–13 November 2015, Florence, Italy.
Gorjian, B., Hayati, A., & Pourkhoni, P.
2013 “Using Praat Software in Teaching Prosodic Features to EFL Learners”. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 84, 34–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, E.
1998 “Pitch accent realizations in English and German”. Journal of Phonetics 26, 129–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Griesbach, H.
2000Bauplan Deutsch: Übungsgrammatik und Satzbauhelfer. Frankfurt: Libri.Google Scholar
Grice, M., Baumann, S., & Benzmüller, R.
2005 “German intonation in autosegmental-Metrical Phonology”. In S. -A. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 55–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gut, U., & Bayerl, P. S.
2004 “Measuring the reliability of manual annotations of speech corpora”. In B. Bell, & I. Marien (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Speech Prosody. Nara, Japan: SProSIG.Google Scholar
Gut, U.
2009Non-native Speech. A Corpus-based analysis of phonological and phonetic properties of L2 English and German. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harst, E., Kaufmann, S., Moritz, U., Rodi, M., Rohrmann, L., Scherling, T., & Sonntag, R.
2015Linie 1 A1 – Deutsch in Alltag und Beruf. Kurs- und Übungsbuch mit DVD-ROM. München: Klett.Google Scholar
Haugen, E., & Joos, M.
1952 “Tone and intonation in East Norwegian”. Acta Philologica Scandinavica 22, 41–64.Google Scholar
Hirst, D.
2016 “On the automatic comparison and cloning of native and non-native speech prosody”. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 8, Boston, 2016, 213–217.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, E. 2015 “CLARIN as European adopter of RDA outputs”. Available at https://​www​.rd​-alliance​.org​/sites​/default​/files​/attachment​/07​-CLARIN​_ErhardHinrichs​.pdf.
Isačenko, A., & Schädlich, H. -J.
1970A Model of Standard German Intonation. The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johner, Ch., Janke, M., Wand, M., & Schultz, T.
2012 “Inferring prosody from facial cues for EMG-based synthesis of silent speech”. In Salvendy, G. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE), Las Vegas, USA, 1–10.Google Scholar
Jones, D.
1909Intonation Curves, a Collection of Phonetic Texts, in which Intonation is Marked Throughout by Means of Curved Lines on a Musical Stave. Leipzig and Berlin: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Kisler, T., Schiel, F., & Sloetjes, H.
2012 “Signal processing via web services: the use case WebMAUS”. Proc. Digital Humanities, Hamburg, Germany, 30–34.Google Scholar
Klinghardt, H.
1923French Intonation Exercises. Cambridge: Heffer.Google Scholar
1927Übungen im deutschen Tonfall. Leipzig: Meyer.Google Scholar
Kohler, K. J.
1990 “Macro and micro F0 in the synthesis of intonation”. In J. Kingston, & M. E. Beckman (Eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology I. Cambridge: CUP, 115–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991 “The interaction of fundamental frequency and intensity in the perception of intonation”, Proc. 12th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Aix-en-Provence, France, 186–189.Google Scholar
1997 “Modelling prosody in spontaneous speech”. In Y. Sagisaka, N. Campbell, & N. Higuchi (Eds.), Computing Prosody. Computational Models for Processing Spontaneous Speech. New York: Springer, 187–210.Google Scholar
Kügler, F.
2008 “The role of duration as a phonetic correlate of focus”, Proc. 4th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Campinas, Brazil, 591–594.Google Scholar
Kügler, F., Smolibocki, B., Baumann, S., Braun, B., Grice, M., Jannedy, S., Niebuhr, O., Peters, J., Schweitzer, K., Schweitzer, A., & Wagner, P.
2015 “DIMA – Annotation guidelines for German intonation”, Proc. 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow, Scotland.Google Scholar
Ladd, R. D.
1978 “Stylized intonation”. Language 54, 517–540. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mehlhorn, G., & Trouvain, J.
2007 “Sensibilisierung von Lernenden für fremdsprachliche Prosodie”. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht 12, 1–15.Google Scholar
Meireles, A.R., Simões, A.R.M., Ribeiro, A.C., & de Medeiro, B.R.
2017Musical Speech: A New Methodology for Transcribing Speech Prosody. In Lacerda, F., Heldner, M., Gustafsson, J., & Strömbergsson, S. (eds.), Proceedings 18th International Interspeech Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 334–338.Google Scholar
Möbius, B.
1993Ein quantitatives Modell der deutschen Intonation: Analyse und Synthese von Grundfrequenzverläufen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Niebuhr, O.
2010 “On the phonetics of intensifying emphasis in German”. Phonetica 67, 170–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “The acoustic complexity of intonation”. In E. -L. Asu, & P. Lippus (Eds.), Nordic Prosody XI. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 15–29.Google Scholar
2015 “Gender differences in the prosody of German questions”. Proc. 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow, Scotland.Google Scholar
Niebuhr, O., & Dilley, L. 2016 “Prosody and perception – approaching the real complexity of pitch-accent perception”. Paper presented at the Aix Summer School on Prosody: Methods in Prosody and Intonation Research. Available at http://​aixprosody2016​.weebly​.com​/uploads​/2​/6​/4​/4​/26448693​/abstract​_dilleyniebuhr​_perceptioni​_ii​.pdf.
O’Connor, J. D., & Arnold, G.
1973Intonation of Colloquial English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Peters, B.
1999 “Prototypische Intonationsmuster in deutscher Lese- und Spontansprache”. Arbeitsberichte des Instituts für Phonetik und Digitale Sprachverarbeitung der Universität Kiel (AIPUK) 34, 1–177.Google Scholar
Peters, B., & Kohler, K. J.
2004 “Trainingsmaterialien zur prosodischen Etikettierung mit dem Kieler Intonationsmodell KIM”. Available at kiel​.de​/kjk​/pub​_exx​/bpkk2004​_1​/TrainerA4​.pdf.
Pierrehumbert, J.
1980The Phonology and Phonetics of English Intonation. PhD thesis. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Pike, K.
1945The Intonation of American English. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Prom-om, S., & Xu, Y.
2010 “The qTA toolkit for prosody: learning underlying parameters of communicative functions through modeling”, Proc. 5th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Chicago, USA, 1–5.Google Scholar
Rathcke, T. V.
2013 “On the neutralizing status of truncation in intonation: a perception study of boundary tones in German and Russian”. Journal of Phonetics 41, 172–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selting, M., Barth-Weingarten, D., Bergmann, J., Bergmann, P., Birkner, K., Couper-Kuhlen, E., Deppermann, A., Gilles, P., Günthner, S., Hartung, M., Kern, F., Mertzlufft, Ch., Meyer, Ch., Morek, M., Oberzaucher, F., Peters, J., Quasthoff, U., Schütte, W., Stukenbrock, A., & Uhmann, S.
2009 “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2)”. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10, 353–402.Google Scholar
Steele, J.
1775/1969An Essay towards Establishing the Melody and Measure of Speech. Menston: The Scholar Press.Google Scholar
‘t Hart, J., Collier, R., & Cohen, A.
1990A Perceptual Study of Intonation: An Experimental Phonetic Approach to Speech Melody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wahlster, W.
(Ed.) 2000Verbmobil: Foundations of Speech-to-Speech Translation. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walter, M., Schmidt, K., Lüdeling, A., Byrnes, H., & Maxim, H.
Wang, H., Mok, P., & Meng, H.
2016 “Capitalizing on musical rhythm for prosodic training in computer-aided language learning”. Computer Speech and Language 37, 67–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wightman, C. W., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Ostendorf, M., & Price, P. J.
1992 “Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 91, 1707–1717. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stock, E. &, Zacharias, C.
1973Deutsche Satzintonation. Leipzig: VEB.[ p. 277 ]Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Levis, John M.
2018.  In Intelligibility, Oral Communication, and the Teaching of Pronunciation, Crossref logo
Levis, John M.
2018. Plenary talk. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 4:2  pp. 260 ff. Crossref logo
Nguyen Van, Nhi, Son Luu Xuan, Iurii Lezhenin, Natalia Bogach, Evgeny Pyshkin, D. Roy, G. Fragulis & H.A. Cantu Campos
2021. Adopting StudyIntonation CAPT Tools to Tonal Languages Through the Example of Vietnamese. SHS Web of Conferences 102  pp. 01007 ff. Crossref logo
Niebuhr, Oliver
2020. J.M. Levis, Intelligibility, Oral Communication, and the Teaching of Pronunciation , Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series, Vol. 27, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. Phonetica 77:4  pp. 289 ff. Crossref logo
Niebuhr, Oliver & Jana Neitsch
2020.  In Speech and Computer [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 12335],  pp. 357 ff. Crossref logo
Silpachai, Alif
2020. The role of talker variability in the perceptual learning of Mandarin tones by American English listeners. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation Crossref logo
Trouvain, Jürgen, Frank Zimmerer, Bernd Möbius, Mária Gósy & Anne Bonneau
2017. Segmental, prosodic and fluency features in phonetic learner corpora. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 3:2  pp. 105 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 august 2021. 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.