Part of
English Prosody in First and Second Language Speakers: A contrastive interlanguage analysis across intonational dimensionsKarin McClellan
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 120] 2024
► pp. xi–xiv
Karin McClellan
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 120] 2024
► pp. xi–xiv
List of figures
Figure 1.The structure of intonation (see Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986). Obligatory
elements are enclosed in solid lines and optional ones in dashed lines. PA=Pitch Accent, PhA=Phrase Accent, BT=Boundary Tone,
Accent, PS=Prominent Syllable(s)
Figure 2.Praat screenshot of annotation tiers (file BE018)
Figure 3.Praat screenshot of a quoted speech sample (file CZ001)
Figure 4.Illustration of different types of uptalk tunes by shape and pragmatic function (file CZ032)
Figure 5.High and low pitch accents by VARIETY and pragmatic functions of ips
Figure 6.Boxplots for normalized frequencies of seven pitch accents (phip) by VARIETY
Figure 7.Boxplots for normalized frequencies of four phrase accents (phip) by VARIETY
Figure 8.Boxplots for normalized frequencies of five boundary tones (phip) by VARIETY
Figure 9.Effect plots for multiple logistic regression results for the distribution of high tones and significant predictors
Figure 10.Effect plots for multiple logistic regression results for the distribution of high tones and significant predictors for
complete learner data
Figure 11.Effect plots for pitch accent frequency by ip and significant predictors
Figure 12.Effect plots for pitch accent frequency by ip and significant predictors for learner data only
Figure 13.Relative tune frequency by VARIETY and TUNE_PATTERN
Figure 14.Effect plots for linear regression results for tune pattern frequency (phip) and the interaction TUNE_PATTERN * VARIETY
Figure 15.Normalized frequencies (phw) of fluency and segmental phenomena by VARIETY
Figure 16.Normalized frequencies (phw) of UPs between and within IUs by VARIETY
Figure 17.Fluency and segmental features in seconds by VARIETY
Figure 18.Boxplots with TTR and Guiraud-INDEX by VARIETY
Figure 19.IU frequencies in phw by SPEAKING_STYLE, PROSOIDC_BREAK_TYPE and VARIETY
Figure 20.Intermediate phrases (here IMs) per IP by VARIETY and SPEAKING_STYLE
Figure 21.Effect plots IU frequency (log2) by VARIETY, PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE, SPS, and SPEAKING_STYLE
Figure 22.Number of pruned and unpruned lengths of phrases in seconds, syllables, and words by VARIETY and PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE
Figure 23.Effect plots for pruned IU lengths in syllables (log2) by VARIETY, PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE, and AGE
Figure 24.Effect plots for pruned IU length in syllables (log2) by VARIETY, STAB, TOPIC and PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE
Figure 25.Effect plot for IU length in syllables (pruned) by CEFR level
Figure 26.Articulation rate (syll/s) by VARIETY
Figure 27.Effect plots for logged syll/s (SPS) by VARIETY * SPEAKING_STYLE and PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE and IM_PHW (log2)
Figure 28.Effect plots for syll/s (SPS) and STAB and INTERVIEWER_INFLUENCE
Figure 29.Effect plot for syll/s (SPS) by CEFR level
Figure 30.F0 in Hz by MEASURE, VARIETY and SEX by ip
Figure 31.F0 span in ST by VARIETY, SEX, and PROSODIC_BREAK_TYPE
Figure 32.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of f0 span in ST by
significant predictors
Figure 33.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of f0 span in ST by
TUNE_PATTERN and VARIETY
Figure 34.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of mean f0 level in
Hz by significant predictors
Figure 35.Boxplots for DID-scores in Hz by VARIETY, SEX, and TONE_TYPE
Figure 36.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of DID-scores and significant predictors
Figure 37.Barplot for uptalk instances (in percent) proportionally to the number of all ips by speaker and VARIETY
Figure 38.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of f0 minimum at rise
onset in an uptalk tune and significant predictors
Figure 39.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of f0 minimum at tune
low in an uptalk tune and significant predictors
Figure 40.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of f0 rise span in
STs in an uptalk tune
Figure 41.Effect plot for the correlation of rise duration and slope in STs by VARIETY
Figure 42.Boxplots for relative slope of rise in STs (log2) by VARIETY
Figure 43.Boxplots for rise duration in seconds by VARIETY
Figure 44.Effect plots for mixed effects model results of relative slope of uptalk tunes in STs
Figure 45.Explanatory model of the prosodic production of the Czech, German, and Spanish learner groups (AR = articulation rate)
