Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:00:55.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 9 - The Phonetics-Prosody Interface and Prosodic Strengthening in Korean

from Part II - Phonetics and Phonology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2022

By
Taehong Cho
Edited by
Sungdai Cho  and
John Whitman
Sungdai Cho
Affiliation:
Binghamton University, State University of New York
John Whitman
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Chapter 9 explores prosodic structure as an integral component of linguistic structure. Prosodic structure specifies how phonological constituents are to be grouped to form larger units within a given utterance; this is known as their delimitative function. Prosodic structure also helps determine which of phonological constituents are produced with prominence relative to the other constituents; this is known as its culminative function. These functions entail strengthening of segmental realization (prosodic strengthening), often leading to linguistic enhancement of syntagmatic and paradigmatic contrast. Theories of the phonetics-prosody interface assume that phonetic realization of the spoken utterance is fine-tuned according to prosodic structure. In turn, crucial aspects of phonetic realization signal higher-order prosodic structure for listeners.

Keywords

phoneticsprosodyprosodic structureprosodic strengtheningphonetics-prosody interfacephonetic grammarspeech productionspeech perception
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Korean Linguistics , pp. 248 - 293
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arvaniti, A., and Garding, G.. 2007. Dialectal variation in the rising accents of American English. In Hualde, J. and Cole, J., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 9. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 547–76.Google Scholar
Arvaniti, A., Ladd, D. R., and Mennen, I.. 2000. What is a starred tone? Evidence from Greek. In Broe, M. and Pierrehumbert, J., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 5: Acquisition and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 119–31.Google Scholar
Atterer, M., and Ladd, D. R.. 2004. On the phonetics and phonology of “segmental anchoring” of F0: Evidence from German. Journal of Phonetics 32: 177–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bang, H., Sonderegger, M., Kang, Y., Clayards, M., and Yoon, T.. 2018. The emergence, progress, and impact of sound change in progress in Seoul Korean: Implications for mechanisms of tonogenesis. Journal of Phonetics 66: 120–44.Google Scholar
Baumann, S., and Winter, B.. 2018. What makes a word prominent? Predicting untrained German listeners’ perceptual judgments. Journal of Phonetics 70: 20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, M. E. 1996. The parsing of prosody. Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 17–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beddor, P. S. 2009. A coarticulatory path to sound change. Language 85(4): 785–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkovits, R. 1993. Utterance-final lengthening and the duration of final-stop closures. Journal of Phonetics 21: 479–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkovits, R. 1994. Durational effects in final lengthening, gapping, and contrastive stress. Language and Speech 37: 237–50.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. 1998. Functional phonology: Formalizing the interactions between articulatory and perceptual drives. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bruce, G. 1977. Swedish Word Accents in Sentence Perspective. Gleerup, Lund: Travaux de L’institut de Linguistique de Lund XII.Google Scholar
Byrd, D. 2000. Articulatory vowel lengthening and coordination at phrasal junctures. Phonetica 57: 3–16.Google Scholar
Byrd, D. 2006. Relating prosody and dynamic events: Commentary on the papers by Cho, Navas, and Smiljanić. In Goldstein, L., Whalen, D., and Best, C., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 8. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 549–61.Google Scholar
Byrd, D., and Saltzman, E.. 1998. Intragestural dynamics of multiple prosodic boundaries. Journal of Phonetics 26: 173–99.Google Scholar
Byrd, D., and Saltzman, E.. 2003. The elastic phrase: Modeling the dynamics of boundary-adjacent lengthening. Journal of Phonetics 31: 149–80.Google Scholar
Byrd, D., Krivokapić, J., and Lee, S.. 2006. How far, how long: On the temporal scope of prosodic boundary effects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120: 1589–99.Google Scholar
Byrd, D., Kaun, A., Narayanan, S., and Saltzman, E.. 2000. Phrasal signatures in articulation. In Broe, M. and Pierrehumbert, J., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 5: Acquisition and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 70–88.Google Scholar
Chen, Y., and Gussenhoven, C.. 2008. Emphasis and tonal implementation in Standard Chinese. Journal of Phonetics 36(4): 724–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, T. 2004. Prosodically conditioned strengthening and vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in English. Journal of Phonetics 32: 141–76.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2005. Prosodic strengthening and featural enhancement: Evidence from acoustic and articulatory realizations of /a, i/ in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 117(6): 3867–78.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2006. Manifestation of prosodic structure in articulation: Evidence from lip kinematics in English. In Goldstein, L. M., Whalen, D. H., and Best, C. T., eds., Laboratory Phonology 8: Varieties of Phonological Competence. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 519–48.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2008. Prosodic strengthening in transboundary V-to-V lingual movement in American English. Phonetica 65: 45–61.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2011. Laboratory phonology. In Kula, N. C., Botma, B., and Nasukawa, K., eds., The Continuum Companion to Phonology. London/New York: Continuum, pp. 343–68.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2015. Language effects on timing at the segmental and suprasegmental levels. In Redford, M., ed., The Handbook of Speech Production. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 505–29.Google Scholar
Cho, T. 2016. Prosodic boundary strengthening in the phonetics-prosody interface. Language and Linguistics Compass 10(3): 120–41.Google Scholar
Cho, T., and Jun, S.. 2000. Domain-initial strengthening as featural enhancement: Aerodynamic evidence from Korean. Chicago Linguistics Society 36: 31–44.Google Scholar
Cho, T., and Keating, P.. 2001. Articulatory and acoustic studies of domain-initial strengthening in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 29: 155–90.Google Scholar
Cho, T., and Keating, P.. 2009. Effects of initial position versus prominence in English. Journal of Phonetics 37: 466–85.Google Scholar
Cho, T., and Ladefoged, L.. 1999. Variation and universals in VOT: Evidence from 18 languages. Journal of Phonetics 27: 207–29.Google Scholar
Cho, T., and McQueen, J.. 2005. Prosodic influences on consonant production in Dutch: Effects of prosodic boundaries, phrasal accent and lexical stress. Journal of Phonetics 33: 121–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, T., Jun, S-A., and Ladefoged, P.. 2002. Acoustic and aerodynamic correlates of Korean stops and fricatives. Journal of Phonetics 30: 193–228.Google Scholar
Cho, T., Kim, D., and Kim, S.. 2017. Prosodically conditioned fine-tuning of coarticulatory vowel nasalization in English. Journal of Phonetics 64: 71–89.Google Scholar
Cho, T., Kim, D., and Kim, S.. 2019. Prosodic strengthening in reference to the lexical pitch accent system in South Kyungsang Korean. The Linguistic Review 36(1): 85–116.Google Scholar
Cho, T., Kim, J., and Kim, S.. 2013. Preboundary lengthening and preaccentual shortening across syllables in a trisyllabic word in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 133(5): EL384–EL390.Google Scholar
Cho, T., Lee, Y., and Kim, S.. 2011. Communicatively driven versus prosodically driven hyper-articulation in Korean. Journal of Phonetics 39(3): 344–61.Google Scholar
Cho, T., McQueen, J., and Cox, E.. 2007. Prosodically driven phonetic detail in speech processing: The case of domain-initial strengthening in English. Journal of Phonetics 35: 210–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, T., Son, M., and Kim, S.. 2016. Articulatory reflexes of the three-way contrast in labial stops and kinematic evidence for domain-initial strengthening in Korean. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 46; 129–55.Google Scholar
Cho, T., Whalen, D. H., and Docherty, G.. 2019. Voice onset time and beyond: Exploring laryngeal contrast in 19 languages. Journal of Phonetics 72: 52–65.Google Scholar
Choi, J., Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2020. An apparent-time study of an ongoing sound change in Seoul Korean: A prosodic account. PloS ONE 15(10): e0240682: 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240682.Google Scholar
Choi, J., Lee, J., Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2018. Prosodically-conditioned phonetic cues in production of Korean aspirated vs. lenis stops. In Cho, T., Kim, S., Choi, J., Kim, J., Kim, S., and Kim, K., eds., HisPhonCog: Hanyang International Symposium on Phonetics and Cognitive Sciences of Language 1: 121.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., and Halle, M.. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row. (Reprinted, 1991, Boston: The MIT Press.)Google Scholar
Coetzee, A. W., Beddor, P., Shedden, K., Styler, W., and Wissing, D.. 2018. Plosive voicing in Afrikaans: Differential cue weighting and tonogenesis. Journal of Phonetics 66: 185–216.Google Scholar
De Jong, J. J. 1995. The supraglottal articulation of prominence in English: Linguistic stress as localized hyperarticulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 97: 491–504.Google Scholar
De Jong, K. J. 2004. Stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus in English: Patterns of variation in vowel duration. Journal of Phonetics 32: 493–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Jong, K. J., and Zawaydeh, B. A.. 2002. Comparing stress, lexical focus, and segmental focus: Patterns of variation in Arabic vowel duration. Journal of Phonetics 30: 53–75.Google Scholar
Flemming, E. 1995. Auditory representations in phonology. Ph.D. Dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J. 2010. The prosody of speech: Timing and rhythm. In Hardcastle, W. J., Laver, J., and Gibbon, F. E., eds., The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences (2nd edition). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 523–602.Google Scholar
Fougeron, C. 1999. Prosodically conditioned articulatory variations: A review. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 97: 1–74.Google Scholar
Fougeron, C. 2001. Articulatory properties of initial segments in several prosodic constituents in French. Journal of Phonetics 29: 109–35.Google Scholar
Fougeron, C., and Keating, P. A.. 1997. Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106: 3728–40.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A. 1988. Periodic dwindling of acoustic and articulatory variables in speech production. Paw Review 3: 10–13.Google Scholar
Gaskell, M. G., and Marslen-Wilson, W. D.. 1996. Phonological variation and inference in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 22: 144–58.Google ScholarPubMed
Gaskell, M. G., and Snoeren, N. D.. 2008. The impact of strong assimilation on the perception of connected speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 34(6): 1632–47.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. 1976. Autosegmental phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. 1990. Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. M. 2008. Universals in phonology. The Linguistic Review 25: 83–137.Google Scholar
Jang, J., and Katsika, A.. 2020. The amount of scope of phrase-final lengthening in Seoul Korean. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Speech Prosody, pp. 270–4. Tokyo, Japan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, J., Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2018. Focus and boundary effects on coarticulatory vowel nasalization in Korean with implications for cross-linguistic similarities and differences. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 144: EL33–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jun, S-A. 1993. The phonetics and phonology of Korean prosody. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A. 1995a. Asymmetrical prosodic effects on the laryngeal gesture in Korean. In Connell, B. and Arvaniti, A., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 4: Phonology and Phonetic Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 235–53.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A. 1995b. An acoustic study of Korean stress. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 98: 2893.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A. 1996. Influence of microprosody on macroprosody: A case of phrase initial strengthening. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 92: 97–116.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A. 1998. The Accentual Phrase in the Korean prosodic hierarchy. Phonology 15(2): 189–226.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A. 2000. K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) Labelling Conventions (Version 3.1). www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/jun/ktobi/K-tobi.htmlGoogle Scholar
Jun, S-A. 2014. Prosodic typology: By prominence type, word prosody, and macro-rhythm. In Jun, S-A., ed., Prosodic Typology 2: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 520–39.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A., Beckman, M., and Lee, H.. 1998. Fiberscopic evidence for the influence on vowel devoicing of the glottal configurations for Korean obstruents. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 96: 43–68.Google Scholar
Jun, S-A., and Fougeron, C.. 2002. Realizations of accentual phrase in French intonation. Probus 14: 147–72Google Scholar
Kang, Y. 2014. Voice Onset Time merger and development of tonal contrast in Seoul Korean stops: A corpus study. Journal of Phonetics 45: 76–90.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. 1984. Phonetic and phonological representation of stop consonant voicing. Language 60: 286–319.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. 1985. Universal phonetics and the organization of grammars. In Fromkin, V. A., ed., Phonetic Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Peter Ladefoged. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, pp. 115–32.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. 1990. The window model of coarticulation: Articulatory evidence. In Kingston, J. and Beckman, M., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and the Physics of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 451–70.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A. 2006. Phonetic encoding of prosodic structure. In Harrington, J. and Tabain, M., eds., Speech Production: Models, Phonetic Processes, and Techniques. New York and Hove: Psychology Press, pp.167–86.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A., Cho, T., Fougeron, C., and Hsu, C.. 2003. Domain-initial strengthening in four languages. In Local, J., Ogden, R., and Temple, R., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 6: Phonetic Interpretations. Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145–63.Google Scholar
Keating, P. A., and Shattuck-Hufnagel, S.. 2002. A prosodic view of word form encoding for speech production. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 101: 112–56.Google Scholar
Kim, J., and Jun, S.-A.. 2009. Prosodic structure and focus prosody of South Kyungsang Korean. Language Research 45(1): 43–66.Google Scholar
Kim, S. 2004. The role of prosodic phrasing in Korean word segmentation. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
Kim, S-J. 2000. Accentual effects on segmental phonological rules in Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Kim, S., Broersma, M., and Cho, T.. 2012. The use of prosodic cues in processing an unfamiliar language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 34(3): 415–44.Google Scholar
Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2009. The use of phrase-level prosodic information in lexical segmentation: Evidence from word-spotting experiments in Korean. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 125(5): 3373–86.Google Scholar
Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2013. Prosodic boundary information modulates phonetic categorization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 134(1): EL19–EL25.Google Scholar
Kim, S., and Cho, T.. 2014. Articulatory modification of /m/ in the coda and the onset as a function of prosodic boundary strength and focus in Korean. Journal of the Korean Society of Speech Sciences 6(4): 3–15.Google Scholar
Kim, S., Jang, J., and Cho, T.. 2017. Articulatory characteristics of preboundary lengthening in interaction with prominence on tri-syllabic words in American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 142(4): EL362–8.Google Scholar
Kim, S., Kim, J., and Cho, T.. 2018. Prosodic-structural modulation of stop voicing contrast along the VOT continuum in trochaic and iambic words in American English. Journal of Phonetics 71: 65–80.Google Scholar
Kim, S., Mittererer, H., and Cho, T.. 2018. A time course of prosodic modulation in phonological inferencing: The case of Korean post-obstruent tensing. PLOS ONE 13(8): e0202912, 1–28.Google Scholar
Kim, Y. 2011. An acoustic, aerodynamic and perceptual investigation of word-initial denasalization in Korean. Ph.D. dissertation, University College London.Google Scholar
Kingston, J. 2011. Tonogenesis. In van Oostendorp, M., Ewen, C. J., Hume, E., and Rice, K., eds., Blackwell Companion to Phonology 5. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 2304–34.Google Scholar
Kingston, J., and Diehl, R. L.. 1994. Phonetic knowledge. Language 70: 419–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, J. 2018. Onset pitch perturbations and the cross-linguistic implementation of voicing: Evidence from tonal and non-tonal languages. Journal of Phonetics 71: 326–54.Google Scholar
Krakow, R. A., Bell-Berti, F., and Wang, Q. E.. 1995. Supralaryngeal declination: Evidence from the velum. In Bell-Berti, F. and Raphael, J. J., eds., Producing Speech: Contemporary Issues: For Katherine Safford Harris. Melville, Long Island, New York: AIP Publishing, pp. 333–54.Google Scholar
Krivokapić, J. 2012. Prosodic planning in speech production. In Fuchs, Susanne, Weihrich, Melanie, Pape, Daniel, and Perrier, Pascal, eds., Speech Planning and Dynamics. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang, pp. 157–90.Google Scholar
Kubozono, H. 2018. Pitch accent. In Hasegawa, Y., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Japanese Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 154–80.Google Scholar
Kučerová, I., and Neeleman, A.. 2012. Contrasts and Positions in Information Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kühnert, B., and Nolan, F.. 1999. The origin of coarticulation. In Hardcastle, W. J. and Hewlett, N., eds., Coarticulation: Theory, Data and Techniques in Speech Production. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 7–30.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. 2004. Segmental anchoring of pitch movements: Autosegmental phonology or speech production? In Quené, H. and van Heuven, V., eds., On Speech and Language: Studies for Sieb G. Nooteboom. Utrecht: Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics (LOT), pp. 123–32.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. 2006. Segmental anchoring of pitch movements: Autosegmental association or gestural coordination? Rivista di Linguistica [Italian Journal of Linguistics] 18: 19–38.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. 2008. Intonational Phonology, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R., Schepman, A., White, L., Quarmby, L. M., and Stackhouse, R.. 2009. Structural and dialectal effects of pitch peak alignment in two varities of British English. Journal of Phonetics 37: 145–61.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R., and Schmid, S.. 2018. Obstruent voicing effects on F0, but without voicing: Phonetic correlates of Swiss German lenis, fortis, and aspirated stops. Journal of Phonetics 71: 229–48.Google Scholar
Lim, B-J., and de Jong, K.. 1999. Tonal alignment in standard Korean: The case of younger generation. Paper presented at the Western Conference on Linguistics, University of Texas, El Paso, TX.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. 1963. Spectrographic study of the vowel reduction. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 35: 1773–81.Google Scholar
Lombardi, L. 1991. Laryngeal features and laryngeal neutralization. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Mitterer, H, Cho, T., and Kim, S.. 2016. How does prosody influence speech categorization? Journal of Phonetics 54: 68–79.Google Scholar
Moon, S. J., and Lindblom, B.. 1994. Interaction between duration, context, and speaking style in English stressed vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 96: 40–55.Google Scholar
Mücke, D., and Grice, M.. 2014. The effect of focus marking on supralaryngeal articulation – Is it mediated by accentuation? Journal of Phonetics 44: 47–61.Google Scholar
Nakai, S., Kunnari, S., Turk, A., Suomi, K., and Ylitalo, R.. 2008. Utterance-final lengthening and quantity in Northern Finnish. Journal of Phonetics 37: 39–45.Google Scholar
Nespor, M., and Vogel, I.. 1986. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Oh, E. 2011. Effects of speaker gender on voice onset time in Korean stops. Journal of Phonetics 39: 59–67.Google Scholar
Park, K. C. 2004. The phrase-initial high in Korean. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 10: 203–23.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J., and Beckman, M.. 1988. Japanese Tone Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J., and Talkin, D.. 1992. Lenition of /h/ and glottal stop. In Docherty, G. and Ladd, D. R., eds., Papers in Laboratory Phonology 2: Gesture, Segment, Prosody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 90–117.Google Scholar
Prieto, P., and Torreira, F.. 2007. The segmental anchoring hypothesis revisited. Syllable structure and speech rate effects on peak timing in Spanish. Journal of Phonetics 35: 473–500.Google Scholar
Saffran, J. R. 2001. The use of predictive dependencies in language learning. Journal of Memory and Language 44: 493–515.Google Scholar
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., and Aslin, R. N.. 1996. Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language 35: 606–21.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1984. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. 1995. Sentence prosody: Intonation, stress, and phrasing. In Goldsmith, J. A., ed., The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 550–69.Google Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., and Turk, A. E.. 1996. A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditory sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 25(2): 193–247.Google Scholar
Shepherd, M. A. 2008. The scope and effects of preboundary prosodic lengthening in Japanese. USC Working Papers in Linguistics 4: 1–14.Google Scholar
Silva, D. J. 2006. Acoustic evidence for the emergence of tonal contrast in contemporary Korean. Phonology 23(2): 287–308.Google Scholar
Tabain, M. 2003. Effects of prosodic boundary on /aC/ sequences: Articulatory results. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113: 2834–49.Google Scholar
Tremblay, A., Cho, T., Kim, S., and Shin, S.. 2018. Gradient effects of tonal scaling in the segmentation of Korean speech: An artificial-language segmentation study. In Proceedings of the 9th Internatinal Conference on Speech Prosody 2018 (pp. 65–9). Poznań, Poland.Google Scholar
Turk, A. E., and Shattuck-Hufnagel, S.. 2007. Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. Journal of Phonetics 35: 445–72.Google Scholar
Vaissière, J. 1991. Rhythm, accentuation and final lengthening. In Sundberg, J., Nord, L., and Carlson, R., eds., French in Music, Language, Speech and Brain 59: 108–20.Google Scholar
Vayra, M., and Fowler, C.. 1992. Declination of supralaryngeal gestures in spoken Italian. Phonetica 49: 48–60.Google Scholar
Yoshida, K. 2008. Phonetic implementation of Korean denasalization and its variation related to prosody. IULC Working Papers 8(1): 1–23.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×