Despite much research, disagreements abound regarding the detailed charac-teristicsof question intonation in different languages or even in the same language.The present study investigates question intonation in Mandarin by also consideringthe role of focus that is frequently ignored in previous research. In experiment 1,native speakers of Mandarin produced statements, yes/no questions, particle ques-tions,wh-questions, rhetorical questions and confirmation questions with narrowfocus on the initial, medial or final word of the sentence, or on none of the words.Detailed F0 contour analyses showed that focus generated the same pitch rangemodification in questions as in statements, i.e., expanding the pitch range of thefocused word, suppressing (compressing and lowering) that of the post-focuswords, but leaving that of the pre-focus words largely unaffected. When the effects offocus (as well as other functions also potentially present) were controlled by sub-tractingstatement F0 contours from those of the corresponding yes/no questions,the resulting difference curves resembled exponential or even double-exponentialfunctions. Further F0 analyses also revealed an interaction between focus andinterrogative meaning in the form of a boost to the pitch raising by the question start-ingfrom the focused word. Finally, subtle differences in the amount of pitch raisingwere also observed among different types of questions, especially at the sentence-finalposition. Experiment 2 investigated whether listeners could detect both focusand question in the same utterance. Results showed that listeners could identifyboth in most cases, indicating that F0 variations related to the two functions could besimultaneously transmitted. Meanwhile, the lowest identification rates were foundfor neutral focus in questions and for statements with final focus. In both cases, theconfusions seemed to arise from the competing F0 adjustments by interrogativemeaning and focus at the sentence-final position. These findings are consistent withthe functional view of intonation, according to which components of intonation aredefined and organized by individual communicative functions that are independentof each other but are encoded in parallel.

This content is only available via PDF.
2006
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.