Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Jan Volín

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
As repeatedly suggested in [6] and [10], it is potentially misleading to study division of speech into stress-groups without considering a larger context. Therefore, we explored the composition of prosodic phrases in terms of the number of SGs. Figure 4 displays the outcome. Figure 4: Percentual representation of prosodic phrases of various lengths counted in number of stress-groups in them, in two speech styles.

Figure 4 As repeatedly suggested in [6] and [10], it is potentially misleading to study division of speech into stress-groups without considering a larger context. Therefore, we explored the composition of prosodic phrases in terms of the number of SGs. Figure 4 displays the outcome. Figure 4: Percentual representation of prosodic phrases of various lengths counted in number of stress-groups in them, in two speech styles.

Related Figures (5)

Figure 1: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in words in the two speech styles. (Clear = news reading)
Figure 1: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in words in the two speech styles. (Clear = news reading)
Table 2: Numbers of occurrences of two-word SGs classified by word lengths in syllables.
Table 2: Numbers of occurrences of two-word SGs classified by word lengths in syllables.
Figure 2: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in syllables in the two speech styles. If the length of stress-groups in the sample is expressed in syllables rather that words, the shape of the distribution changes (Figure 2), but it is still interpretable. It is perhaps useful to realize that the word is a semantic unit by essence, while the syllable is more of a structural or constructional unit. This might provide a cue in hypothesizing why the conversational style possesses fewer short stress-groups if measured in words, but more short stress-groups if measured in syllables. One- and two-syllable SGs in news reading occurred in 34.9% of the cases, while in conversations they represented 43.7% of all SGs (see the first two pairs of columns in Figure 2). For three- and four-syllable SGs the situation is reversed. Figure 2 also suggests that no stress-groups in our sample were longer than 10 syllables, but anything above 6 syllables is relatively rare. Stress-groups of five and more syllables occur in roughly equal proportion in both speech styles.
Figure 2: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in syllables in the two speech styles. If the length of stress-groups in the sample is expressed in syllables rather that words, the shape of the distribution changes (Figure 2), but it is still interpretable. It is perhaps useful to realize that the word is a semantic unit by essence, while the syllable is more of a structural or constructional unit. This might provide a cue in hypothesizing why the conversational style possesses fewer short stress-groups if measured in words, but more short stress-groups if measured in syllables. One- and two-syllable SGs in news reading occurred in 34.9% of the cases, while in conversations they represented 43.7% of all SGs (see the first two pairs of columns in Figure 2). For three- and four-syllable SGs the situation is reversed. Figure 2 also suggests that no stress-groups in our sample were longer than 10 syllables, but anything above 6 syllables is relatively rare. Stress-groups of five and more syllables occur in roughly equal proportion in both speech styles.
Figure 3: Percentual representation of three-, four- and five-syllable stress-groups in the two speech styles and a rule-based analysis of a written text.
Figure 3: Percentual representation of three-, four- and five-syllable stress-groups in the two speech styles and a rule-based analysis of a written text.
There is a striking, but not inconceivable difference in the utilization of prosodic phrases consisting of just one SG. In conversational speech, such phrases made 47.9% of all phrases produced, whereas in clear speech sample it was only 14.2%. Subsequently, there are much lower relative occurrences of phrases consisting of two or more SGs in dialogues. This disparity is about 11 to 12% for two-SG and three-SG phrases. Very short prosodic phrases in conversational speech are often related to frequent hesitations and pausing — elements that are easy to avoid in read-out speech. Figure 5: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in words in conversational speech. Dark columns refer to phrase that comprise one SG only, lighter one all phrases in conversations.
There is a striking, but not inconceivable difference in the utilization of prosodic phrases consisting of just one SG. In conversational speech, such phrases made 47.9% of all phrases produced, whereas in clear speech sample it was only 14.2%. Subsequently, there are much lower relative occurrences of phrases consisting of two or more SGs in dialogues. This disparity is about 11 to 12% for two-SG and three-SG phrases. Very short prosodic phrases in conversational speech are often related to frequent hesitations and pausing — elements that are easy to avoid in read-out speech. Figure 5: Percentual representation of stress-groups of varying length in words in conversational speech. Dark columns refer to phrase that comprise one SG only, lighter one all phrases in conversations.
Related topics:
PsychologyComputer ScienceSpeech ProsodyPhoneticsPitch accent
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved