Cover not available
Part of
In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language: A corpus-driven approach
Edited by Shlomo Izre'el, Heliana Mello, Alessandro Panunzi and Tommaso Raso
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 94] 2020
► pp. 1–32

Introduction
In search of a basic unit of spoken language

Segmenting speech

 | Tel Aviv University
 | Federal University of Minas Gerais
 | University of Florence – LABLITA
 | Federal University of Minas Gerais
Article outline
  • 1.Why do we need to segment speech?
  • 2.How do we segment speech?
  • 3.How do we use intonation units?
  • 4.The content of this book
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.94.int
References (147)
References
Amir, N., Silber-Varod, V., & Izre’el, S. (2004). Characteristics of intonation unit boundaries in spontaneous spoken Hebrew: Perception and acoustic correlates. In B. Bell & I. Marlien (Eds.), Speech prosody 2004: Proceedings (pp. 677–680). Nara: ISCA.Google Scholar
Avanzi, M., Lacheret-Dujour, A., & Victorri, B. (2008). ANALOR. A tool for semi-automatic annotation of French prosodic structure. In ANALOR. A tool for semi-automatic annotation of French prosodic structure (pp. 119–122). Campinas, Brazil.Google Scholar
Avanzi, M., Simon, A. C., Goldman, J.-P., & Auchlin. (2010). A. C – PROM: An annotated corpus for French prominence study. In Proceedings of speech prosody 2010, prosodic prominence workshop (pp. 11–14). Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Barbosa, P. A. (2008). Prominence-and boundary-related acoustic correlations in Brazilian Portuguese read and spontaneous speech. In Proc. speech prosody (pp. 257–260). Campinas: RG.Google Scholar
(this volume). Cross-linguistic comparison of automatic detection of speech breaks in read and narrated speech in four languages. In S. Izre’el, H. Mello, A. Panunzi, & T. Raso (Eds.), In search of basic units of spoken language: A corpus-driven approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Barbosa, P. A., & Raso, T. (2018). Spontaneous speech segmentation: Functional and prosodic aspects with applications for automatic segmentation. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 26(4), 1361–1396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, D. (2016). Intonation units revisited. Cesura in talk-in-interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, D., Reber, E., & Selting, M. (Eds.). (2010). Prosody in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckman, M., & Elam, G. (1997). Guidelines for ToBI labelling (version 3.0). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Research Foundation. Retrieved from <[URL]>
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Bigi, B., & Meunieur, C. (2018). Automatic segmentation of spontaneous speech. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 26, (4) 1489–1530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckmann, M., & Pierrehumbert, J. (1986). Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C. (2010). Le français: Usages de la langue parlée. Avec la collaboration de Philippe Martin pour l’étude de la prosodie. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., Deulofeu, J., Stefanini, J., & van den Eynde, K. (1984). Pronom et syntaxe. L’approche pronominale et son application au Français. Paris: CNRS-SELAF, AELIA.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., & Jeanjean, C. (1987). Le français parlé. Transcription et édition. Paris: Didier Érudition, Institut national de la Langue française.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., Mirelle Bilger, M., Rouget, Ch., & van den Eynde, K. (1990). Le français parlé: Études grammaticales. : CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar
Bloch, B., & Trager, G. (1942). Outline of linguistic analysis. Baltimore, MD: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Bögels, S., Schriefers, H., Vonk, W., Chwilla, D. J., & Kerkhofs, R. (2010). The interplay between prosody and syntax in sentence processing: The case of subject- and object-control verbs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(5), 1036–1053. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bögels, S., Schriefers, H., Vonk, W., Chwilla, D., & Kerkhofs, R. (2013). Processing consequences of superfluous and missing prosodic breaks in auditory sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 51, 2715–2728. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bögels, S., & Torreira, F. (2015). Listeners use intonational phrase boundaries to project turn ends in spoken interaction. Journal of Phonetics, 52, 46–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1965). Pitch accent and sentence rhythm. In I. Abe & T. Kanekiyo (Eds.), Forms of English: Accent, morpheme, order (pp. 139–180). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Buhmann, J., Caspers, J., van Heuven, V. J., Hoekstra, H., Martens, J-P., & Swerts, M. (2002). Annotation of prominent words, prosodic boundaries and segmental lengthening by non-expert transcribers in the spoken Dutch corpus. In G. Rodriguez & C. Suarez Araujo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd LREC conference (pp. 779–785). Paris: ELRA.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. (1980). The deployment of consciousness in the production of a narrative. In W. Chafe (Ed.), The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural and linguistic aspects of narrative production (pp. 9–50). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
(1994). Discourse, consciousness and time. The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Christodoulides, G. (2018). Acoustic correlates of prosodic boundaries in French. A review of corpus data. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 26(4), 1531–1549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christodoulides, G., Simon, A. C., & Didirková, I. (2018). Perception of prosodic boundaries by naïve and expert listeners in French. Modelling and automatic annotation. In Proceedings of the 9th speech prosody conference (pp. 13–16). Poznań, Poland.Google Scholar
Collier, R., de Pijper, J. R., & Sanderman, A. (1993). Perceived prosodic boundaries and their phonetic correlates. In Human language technology. Proceedings of a workshop held at Plainsboro, NJ (pp. 341–345). Retrieved from <[URL]> DOI logo
Cowan, N. (1998). Visual and auditory working memory capacity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Exploring the possible and necessary in working memory development. Monographs Society Res Child, 81, 149–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cresti, E. (2000). Corpus di italiano parlato. Firenze: Accademia della Crusca.Google Scholar
(2005). Notes on lexical strategy, structural strategies and surface clause indexes in the C-ORAL-ROM spoken corpora. In E. Cresti & M. Moneglia (Eds.), C-ORAL-ROM: Integrated reference corpora for spoken romance languages (pp. 209–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cresti, E., & Moneglia, M. (Ed.). (2005). C-ORAL-ROM: Integrated reference corpora for spoken Romance languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Informational patterning theory and the corpus-based description of spoken language: The compositionality issue in the topic-comment pattern. In M. Moneglia & A. Panunzi. (Eds.), Bootstrapping information from corpora in a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 13–45). Firenze: Firenze University Press. Retrieved from <[URL]>
Crookes, G. V., & Rulon, K. (1985). Incorporation of corrective feedback in native speaker/ non-native speaker conversation. Technical Report No. 3, Center for second language research, Social Science Research Center Institute. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1997). Intonation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D., & Davy, D. (1975). Advanced conversational English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Debaisieux, J.-M. (Ed.). (2013). Analyses linguistiques sur corpus: Subordination et insubordination en français. Cachan: Hermès & Lavoisier.Google Scholar
Den, Y., Koiso, H., Maruyama, T., Maekawa, K., Takanashi, K., Enomoto, M., & Yoshida, N. (2010). Two-level annotation of utterance-units in Japanese dialogs: An empirically emerged scheme. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, M. Rosner, & D. Tapias (Eds.), 7th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC 2010) proceedings (pp. 2103–2110). Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
Deulofeu, J. (2003). L’approche macrosyntaxique en syntaxe: Un nouveau modèle de rasoir d’Occam contre les notions inutiles. Scolia, 16, 47–62.Google Scholar
Di Benedetto, V. (2000). Dionysius thrax and the tékhnē grammatikḗ. In S. Auroux, E. F. K. Koerner, H.-J. Niederehe, & K. Versteegh (Eds.), History of the language sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 394–400). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dilley, L., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Ostendorf, M. (1996). Glottalization of word initial vowels as a function of prosodic structure. Journal of Phonetcs, 24(4), 423–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drury, J. E., Baum, S. R., Valeriote, H., & Steinhauser, K. (2016). Punctuation and implicit prosody in silent reading: An ERP study investigating English garden-path sentences. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W., Chafe, W. L., Meyer, C., & Thompson, S. (2000–2005). Santa Barbara corpus of spoken American English. Washington, DC: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W., Cumming, S., Schuetze-Coburn, S., & Paolino, D. (1992). Discourse transcription. Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics, 4, 1–225.Google Scholar
Du Bois, J. W., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S., & Paolino, D. (1993). Outline of discourse transcription. In J. A. Edwards & M. D. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research, (pp. 45–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 378–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fon, J., Johnson, K., & Chen, S. (2011). Durational patterning at syntactic and discourse boundaries in Mandarin spontaneous speech. Language and Speech, 54(1), 5–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fors, K. L. (2015). Production and perception of pauses in speech (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21, 354–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frazier, L., Clifton, C., & Carlson, K. (2004). Don’t break, or do: Prosodic boundary preferences. Lingua, 114, 3–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frota, S. (1998). Prosody and focus in European Portuguese (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal.Google Scholar
Fuchs, S., Krivokapić, J., & Jannedy, S. (2010). Prosodic boundaries in German: Final lengthening in spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127(3), 1851. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garrote, M., Kimura, C., Matsui, K., Moreno Sandoval, A., & Takamori, E. (2015). C-ORAL-JAPON: Corpus of spontaneous spoken Japanese. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Glushko, A., Steinhauer, K., DePriest, J., & Koelsch, S. (2016). Neurophysiological correlates of musical and prosodic phrasing: Shared processing mechanisms and effects of musical expertise. PLoS ONE, 11(5). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, M., & Ladefoged, P. (2001). Phonation types: A cross-linguistic overview. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 383–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Intonation and grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1970). Language structure and language function. In J. Lyons (Ed.), New horizons in linguistics (pp. 140–165). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
(2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. Fourth edition revised by Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hanson, H. M., Stevens, K. N., Kuo, H-K. J., Chen, M. Y., & Slifka, J. (2001). Towards model of phonation. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 451–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
’t Hart, J., Collier, R., & Cohen, A. (1990). A perceptual study on intonation: An experimental approach to speech melody. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heldner, M. (2011). Detection thresholds for gaps, overlaps, and no-gap-no-overlaps. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(1), 508–513. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hermes, D. J. (2006). Stylization of pitch contours. In S. Sudhoff, D. Lenertová, R. Meyer, S. Pappert, P. Augurzky, I. Mleinek, N. Richter, & J. Schliesser (Eds.), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 29–61). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D. (2000). Towards a functional neuroanatomy of speech perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 131–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofhuis, E. M. F. J., Gussenhoven, C., & Rietveld, T. (1995). Final lengthening at prosodic boundaries in Dutch. In E. Elenius & P. Branderud (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIII international congress of phonetic sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 154–157). Stockholm.Google Scholar
Hunt, K. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels. Champain, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hyams, N., & Orfitelli, R. (2015). The acquisition of syntax. In H. Cairns & E. Fernandez (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 593–614). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hwang, H., & Steinhauer, K. (2011). Phrase length matters: The interplay between implicit prosody and syntax in Korean ‘garden path’ sentences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(11), 3555–3575. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Izre’el, S. (this volume). The basic unit of spoken language and the interface between prosody, discourse and syntax: A view from spontaneous spoken Hebrew. In S. Izre’el, H. Mello, A. Panunzi, & T. Raso (Eds.), In search of basic units of spoken language: A corpus-driven approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Jespersen, O. (1924). The philosophy of grammar. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kibrik, A. A., Korotaev, N. A., & Podlesskaya, V. I. (this volume). Russian spoken discourse: Local structure and prosody. In S. Izre’el, H. Mello, A. Panunzi, & T. Raso (Eds.), In search of basic units of spoken language: A corpus-driven approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Kibrik, A. A., & Podlesskaya, V. I. (2008). Is sentence viable? In The third international conference on cognitive science. Abstracts (Vol. 1, pp. 84–85). Moscow: IP RAN.Google Scholar
Kircher, T. T. J., Brammer, M. J., Levelt, W., Bartels, M., & McGuire, P. K. (2004). Pausing for thought: Engagement of left temporal cortex during pauses in speech. NeuroImage, 21, 84–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krivokapić, J. (2007). The planning, production, and perception of prosodic structure (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Kroll, B. (1977). Combining ideas in written and spoken English: A look at subordination and coordination. In E. O. Keenan & T. L. Bennett (Eds.), Discourse across time and space (pp. 69–108). Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. (2008). Intonation phonology. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lieberman, P. (1960). Some acoustic correlates of word stress in American English. JASA, 32, 451–454. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, J. (2009). Interactional linguistics. In S. D’hondt, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), The pragmatics of interaction (pp. 96–103). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linell, P. (2005). The written language bias in linguistics: Its nature, origins and transformations. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Männel, C., Schipke, C. S., & Friederici, A. D. (2013). The role of pause as a prosodic boundary marker: Language ERP studies in German 3- and 6-year-olds. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 86–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, P. (1973). Les problèmes de l’intonation: Recherches et applications. Langue Française, 19, 4–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). The structure of spoken language. Intonation in Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Intonation, structure prosodique et ondes cérébrales. Introduction à l’analyse prosodique. London: Iste Editions.Google Scholar
Mello, H., Raso, T., Mittmann, M., Vale, H., & Côrtes, P. (2012): Transcrição e segmentação prosódica do corpus C-ORAL-BRASIL: Critérios de implementação e validação. In T. Raso & H. Mello (Eds.), C-ORAL-BRASIL I: Corpus de referência do português brasileiro falado informal (pp. 125–174). Belo Horizonte: UFMG.Google Scholar
Mettouchi, A., & Chanard, C. (2010). From fieldwork to annotated corpora: The CorpAfroAs project. Faits de Langue-Les Cahiers, 2, 255–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mettouchi, A., Lacheret-Dujour, A., Silber-Varod, A., & Izre’el, S. (2007). Only prosody? Perception of speech segmentation in Kabyle and Hebrew. Nouveaux Cahiers de Linguistique Française, 28, 207–218.Google Scholar
Miller, J., & Weinert, R. (1998). Spontaneous Spoken Language: Syntax and Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mo, Y. (2008). Duration and intensity as perceptual cues for naïve listeners’ prominence and boundary perception. In Proceedings of the 4th speech prosody conference (pp. 739–742). Campinas.Google Scholar
Mo, Y., & Cole, J. (2010). Perception of prosodic boundaries in spontaneous speech with and without silent pauses. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127(3), 1956. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moneglia, M. (2005). The C-ORAL-ROM resource. In E. Cresti & M. Moneglia. C-ORAL-ROM: Integrated reference corpora for spoken Romance languages (pp. 1–70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moneglia, M., & Raso, T. (2014). Notes on Language into Act Theory (L-AcT). In T. Raso & H. Mello (Eds.), Spoken corpora and linguistic studies (pp. 468–495). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
(2007). Prosodic phonology. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ni, C. J., Zhang, A. Y., Liu, W. J., & Xu, B. (2012). Automatic prosodic break detection and feature analysis. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 27(6), 1184–1196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nickels, S., Opitz, B., & Steinhauer, K. (2013). ERPs show that classroom-instructed late second language learners rely on the same prosodic cues in syntactic parsing as native speakers. Neuroscience Letters, 557, 107–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, H. E. (1924). A grammar of spoken English: On a strictly phonetic basis. Cambridge: Heffer & Sons.Google Scholar
Pauker, E., Itzhak, I., Baum, S. R., & Steinhauer, K. (2011). Effects of cooperating and conflicting prosody in spoken English garden path sentences: ERP evidence for the boundary deletion hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(10), 2731–2751. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 63–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). MIT.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. (2000). Tonal elements and their alignment. In M. Horne (Ed.), Prosody: Theory and experiment (pp. 11–26). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Pijper, J. R., & Sanderman, A. A. (1994). On the perceptual strength of prosodic boundaries and its relation to suprasegmental cues. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 96(4), 2037–2047. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pike, K. (1945). The intonation of American English. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Raso, T., Barbosa, P. A., Cavalcante, F. A., & Mittmann, M. M. (this volume). Segmentation and analysis of the two English excerpts: The Brazilian team proposal. In S. Izre’el, H. Mello, A. Panunzi, & T. Raso (Eds.), In search of basic units of spoken language: A corpus-driven approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Raso, T., & Mello, H. (Eds.). (2012). C-ORAL-BRASIL I. Corpus de referência do português brasileiro falado informal. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.Google Scholar
Raso, T., & Mittmann, M. (2012). As principais medidas da fala. In T. Raso & H. Mello (Eds.), C-ORAL-BRASIL I Corpus de referência do português brasileiro falado informal (pp. 177–221). Belo Horizonte: UFMG.Google Scholar
Raso, T., Mittmann, M. M., & Oliveira Mendes, A. C. (2015). O papel da pausa na segmentação prosódica de corpora de fala. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 23, 883–922. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Redi, L., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2001). Variation in the realization of glottalization in normal speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 407–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robin, D. A., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (1990). Auditory perception of temporal and spectral events in patients with focal left and right cerebral lesions. Brain and Language, 39, 539–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, C. J. (1988). Origins of complex syntax in interlanguage development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10(3), 371–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. Vol. 1: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selting, M., & Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2001). Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shah, A. P., Baum, S. R., & Dwivedi, V. D. (2006). Neural substrates of linguistic prosody: Evidence from syntactic disambiguation in the productions of brain-damaged patients. Brain and Language, 96, 78–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shriberg, E., Stolcke, A., Hakkani-Tür, D. & Tür, G. (2000). Prosody-based automatic segmentation of speech into sentences and topics. Speech Communication, 32(1–2), 127–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, J. (2011). Conversation analysis: An introduction. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J. & Stivers, T. (2014). The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Silber-Varod, V. (2011). The SpeeCHain perspective: Prosody-syntax interface in spontaneous spoken Hebrew (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tel-Aviv, Israel.Google Scholar
(2013). The SpeeCHain perspective: Form and function of prosodic boundary tones in spontaneous spoken Hebrew. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
Silverman, K., Beckman, M., Pitrelli, J., Ostendorf, M., Wightman, C., Price, P., Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1992). ToBI: A standard for labeling English prosody. In ICSLP-1992 (pp. 867–870).Google Scholar
Simard, C., & Schultze-Berndt, E. (2011). Documentary linguistics and prosodic evidence for the syntax of spoken language. In G. Haig, C. Wegener, S. Schnell, & N. Nau (Eds.), Documenting endangered languages: Achievements and perspectives (pp. 151–176). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. (2001). Review of Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 6, 339–359.Google Scholar
Steedman, M. (2000). The syntactic process. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Steinhauer, K. (2003). Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain and Language, 86(1), 142–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K., Alter, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature Neuroscience, 2(2), 191–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(3), 267–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, J. (Ed.). (1990). The London corpus of spoken English: Description and research. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Swerts, M. (1997). Prosodic features at discourse boundaries of different strength. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101(1), 514–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swerts, M., Collier, R., & Terken, J. (1994). Prosodic predictors of discourse finality in spontaneous monologues. Speech Communication, 15(1–2), 79–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, B. H. F., Barbosa, P. A., & Raso, T. (2018). Automatic detection of prosodic boundaries in Brazilian Portuguese spontaneous speech. In A. Villavicencio, V. Moreira, A. Abad, H. Caseli, P. Gamallo, C. Ramisch, H. G. Oliveira, & G. H. Paetzold (Eds.). Computational processing of the Portuguese language, (pp. 429–437). New York, NY: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, B. H. F., & Mittmann, M. M. (2018). Acoustic models for the automatic identification of prosodic boundaries in spontaneous speech. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 26(4), 1455–1488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thornton, R. (2016). Children’s acquisition of syntactic knowledge. In M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thorsen, N. G. (1985). Intonation and text in standard Danish. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 77(3), 1205–1216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1986). Sentence intonation in textual context. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80(4), 1041–1047. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tseng, C. Y., & Chang, C. H. (2008). Pause or no pause? Prosodic phrase boundaries revisited. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(4), 500–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tseng, C. Y., & Fu, B. L. (2005). Duration, intensity and pause predictions in relation to prosody organization. In Proceedings interspeech 2005 (pp. 1405–1408). Lisbon, Portugal. Retrieved from <[URL]> DOI logo
Tyler, J. (2013). Prosodic correlates of discourse boundaries and hierarchy in discourse production. Lingua, 133, 101–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ulbrich, C. (2006). Prosodic phrasing in three German standard varieties. In Proceedings of the 29th annual Penn linguistics colloquium, (pp. 361–373). Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Whightman, C. W. (2002). ToBI or not ToBI. In Speech prosody 2002, Aix-en-Provence (pp. 25–29). Aix-en-Provence, France.Google Scholar
Wightman, C. W., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., Ostendorf, M., & Price, P. J. (1992). Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91(3), 1707–1717. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, Y. (2006). Principles of tone research. In Proceedings of international symposium on tonal aspects of languages (pp. 3–13). La Rochelle, France.Google Scholar
Zatorre, R. J. (1997). Cerebral correlates of human auditory processing: Perception of speech and musical sounds. In J. Syka (Ed.), Acoustical signal processing in the central auditory system (pp. 453–468). New York, NY: Plenum Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zellers, M., & Post, B. (2010). Aperiodicity at topic structure boundaries. Proceedings of speech prosody 2010: Fifth conference (pp. 451–480). Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (2012). A comparison of cue-weighting in the perception of prosodic phrase boundaries in English and Chinese (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Moneglia, Massimo & Alessandro Panunzi
2022. Micro-Diachronic Corpora for Measuring the Lexical Change of Spontaneous Speech in Florence Compared to Standard Italian. Langages N° 226:2 ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
Rocha, Bruno, Tommaso Raso, Heliana Mello & Lucia Ferrari
2022. Information structure in the speech of individuals with schizophrenia. CHIMERA: Revista de Corpus de Lenguas Romances y Estudios Lingüísticos 9 ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Cimmino, Doriana
2021. Chapter 6. Interactions between distribution and functional uses in Italian adversative pragmatic markers. In Pragmatic Markers and Peripheries [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 325], ► pp. 171 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.