Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 40:2 (2016) ► pp.302–339

The prosody of Focus and Givenness in Hindi and Indian English

This paper reports the results of two identical experiments, one in Hindi and one in Indian English, that elicited semi-spontaneous sentences containing a focused agent or a focused patient. The primary aim of the experiments was to investigate the prosodic correlates of information structure in the two languages and to explain these correlates with a phonological model. The resulting phonological model proposes that focus is realized with enhanced correlates of phrasing and not with prominence, at least not of the same kind as languages using pitch accents. Secondary aims were to verify the ecological validity of similar data elicited with scripted speech (Patil et al. 2008) and to reflect on the place of Hindi and Indian English in a typology of intonation.
Keywords: Hindi, Indian English, information structure, prosody, intonation
Published online: 1 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.40.2.02fer
References (52)
Astésano, C., E. Bard & A. Turk. 2007. Structural influences on initial accent placement in French. Language and Speech 501. 423–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bansal, Ram Krishna. 1976. The Intelligibility of Indian English. 2nd edn. Monograph 4. Hyderabad: CIEFL.Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2005. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.5).Google Scholar
Botinis, Antonis (ed.). 2000. Intonation: Analysis, modeling and technology. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cole, J., Y. Mo & S. Baek. 2010. The role of syntactic structure in guiding prosody perception with ordinary listeners and everyday speech. Language and Cognitive Processes 251. 1141–1177. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooper, William E., Stephen J. Eady & Pamela R. Mueller. 1985. Acoustical aspects of contrastive stress in question-answer contexts. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 771. 2142–2156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan. 2006. The deaccenting of given information: A cognitive universal? In G. Bernini & M.L. Schwartz (eds.), Pragmatic organization of discourse in the languages of Europe, 311–356. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dyrud, Lars O. 2001. Hindi-Urdu: Stress accent or non-stress accent? Grand Forks, ND: University of North Dakota PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline. 2010. The intonation of Indian languages: An areal phenomenon. In Imtiaz Hasnain & Shreesh Chaudhury (eds.), Problematizing language studies. Festschrift for Ramakant Agnihotri, 288–312. New Delhi: Aakar Books.Google Scholar
. 2016. Intonation and prosody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline & Frank Kügler. 2008. Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. Journal of Phonetics 361. 680–703. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambhir, Vijay. 1981. Syntactic restrictions and discourse functions of word order in standard Hindi. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Gargesh, Ravinder. 2004. Indian English: Phonology. In W. Edgar, Bernd Burridge, Rajend Mesthrie Kortmann & Clive Upton (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, Vol 1: Phonology, 993–1002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2008. Notions and subnotions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 551: 231ff. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. The phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harnsberger, James D. 1994. Towards an intonational phonology of Hindi. Ms., University of Florida.Google Scholar
. 1999. The role of metrical structure in Hindi intonation. In South Asian Language. Analysis Roundtable, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Harnsberger, James D. & Jasmeet Judge. 1996. Pitch range and focus in Hindi. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 991. 2493–2500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical stress theory. Principles and case studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce & Aditi Lahiri. 1991. Bengali intonational phonology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 91. 47–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hussain, Sarmad. 1997. Phonetic correlates of lexical stress in Urdu. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Ito, Junko & Armin Mester. 2007. Categories and projections in prosodic structure. Paper presented at Old World Conference in Phonology-4 , Rhodes, Greece.
Jyothi, Preethi, Jennifer Cole, Mark Hasegawa-Johnson & Vandana Puri. 2014. An investigation of prosody in Hindi narrative speech, Proceedings of Speech Prosody. [URL]. (Accessed 12 Jan 2016).
Kachru, Braj B. 1983. The other tongue: English across cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, Yamuna. 1987. Hindi-Urdu. In B. Comrie (ed.), The world’s major languages, 470–489. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Keane, Elinor. 2007a. Distribution and alignment of F0 contours in Tamil. In Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences . Saarbruecken, Germany.
. 2007b. Investigating the intonational phonology of Tamil. Poster presented at the satellite meeting of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS) , Saarbruecken, Germany, August 5, 2007.
Khan, Sameer. 2007. Phrasing and focus in Bengali. Poster presented at the satellite meeting of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS) , Saarbruecken, Germany, August 5, 2007.
Kidwai, Ayesha. 2000. XP-adjunction in universal grammar: Scrambling and binding in Hindi-Urdu. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo. 1981. The syntax of comparative clauses. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 171. 136–155.
Ladd, D. Robert. 1996/2008. Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liberman, M. & J. Pierrehumbert. 1984. Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length. In M. Aronoff & R.T. Oehrle (eds.), Language sound structure, 157–233. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mahboob, Ahmar & Nadra Huma Ahmar. 2004. Pakistani English: Phonology. In W. Edgar, Bernd Burridge, Rajend Mesthrie Kortmann & Clive Upton (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, Vol 1: Phonology, 1003–16. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mo, Y., J. Cole & E-K. Lee. 2008. Naïve listeners’ prominence and boundary perception. Fourth Speech Prosody. 735–736. [URL]. (Accessed 5 Jan 2016). Google Scholar
Moore, Robert R. 1965. A study of Hindi intonation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Nair, Rami. 1999. Syllables and word edges. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University PhD thesis.Google Scholar
. 2001. Acoustic correlates of lexical stress in Hindi. In A. Abbi, R. Gupta & A. Kidwai (eds.), Linguistic structure and language dynamics in South Asia — papers from the proceedings of SALA. XVIII roundtable, 123–143.Google Scholar
Ohala, Manjari. 1986. A search for the phonetic correlates of Hindi stress. In B. Krishnamurti (ed.), South Asian languages: Structure, convergence, and diglossia, 81–92. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Pandey, Pramod. 1989. Word accentuation in Hindi. Lingua 771. 37–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pandey, Pramod K. 1994. On a description of the phonology of Indian English. In R.K. Agnihotri & A.L. Khanna (eds.), Second language acquisition. Socio-cultural and linguistic aspects of English in India. Research in applied linguistics, 198–207. Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
. to appear. Revisiting word-stress in Hindi. Delhi: Manuscript.
Patil, Umesh, Gerrit Kentner, Anja Gollrad, Frank Kügler, Caroline Féry & Shravan Vasishth. 2008. Focus, word order and intonation in Hindi. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 11. 53–70.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Bloomington, IN: MIT PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Post, Brechtje. 2000. Tonal and phrasal structures in French intonation. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Puri, Vandana. 2013. Intonation in Indian English and Hindi late and simul-taneous bilinguals. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanja. 1981. Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 271. 53–94.Google Scholar
Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. Amherst: University of Massachusetts PhD thesis.Google Scholar
. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 11. 75–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2007. Contrastive focus, givenness and the unmarked status of discourse-new. In C. Féry, G. Fanselow & M. Krifka (eds.), Interdisciplinary studies on information Structure (ISIS 6). 125–145.Google Scholar
Steedman, Mark 2000. Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry 311. 649–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1995. Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus and prominence. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Yoon, T-J., S. Chavarría, J. Cole & M. Hasegawa-Johnson. 2004. Intertranscriber reliability of prosodic labeling on telephone conversation using ToBI. Interspeech 20041. 2729–2732.Google Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Féry, Caroline, Ingo Feldhausen & Frank Kügler
2024. An Introduction to the Special Issue “Syntax-Phonology Interface and Recursivity”. Languages 9:2 ► pp. 48 ff. DOI logo
Kim, Jiseung & Anja Arnhold
2024. Phonetic and phonological aspects of prosodic focus marking in Canadian English. Laboratory Phonology 15:1 DOI logo
Jabeen, Farhat & Bettina Braun
2023. How cross–linguistic influence affects the use of duration in the production and perception of corrective and non–corrective focus types. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism DOI logo
Maxwell, Olga & Elinor Payne
2023. Investigating (Rhythm) Variation in Indian English: An Integrated Approach. In Speech Rhythm in Learner and Second Language Varieties of English [Prosody, Phonology and Phonetics, ], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Jabeen, Farhat
2022. Word Order, Intonation, and Prosodic Phrasing: Individual Differences in the Production and Identification of Narrow and Wide Focus in Urdu. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
Borise, Lena
2021. Focus projection need not be based on pitch accents: evidence from Georgian. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1 DOI logo
Sabu, Kamini & Preeti Rao
2021. Prosodic event detection in children’s read speech. Computer Speech & Language 68 ► pp. 101200 ff. DOI logo
Bhatt, Rajesh & Veneeta Dayal
2020. Polar question particles: Hindi-Urdu kya:. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 38:4 ► pp. 1115 ff. DOI logo
Tseng, Amelia & Lars Hinrichs
2020. Mobility and the English Language. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, ► pp. 637 ff. DOI logo
Bishop, Jason
2019. Caroline Féry (2017). Intonation and prosodic structure. (Key Topics in Phonology.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. xi + 374.. Phonology 36:1 ► pp. 171 ff. DOI logo
Zerbian, Sabine
2019. Aspects of Sentence Intonation in Black South African English. In English in Multilingual South Africa, ► pp. 329 ff. DOI logo
Gautam, Sumanlata & Latika Singh
2018. Variations in relationship between fundamental frequency and intensity in speech of children during development. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science 2:1-2 ► pp. 59 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 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.