Tonal coarticulation in Northern and Southern Vietnamese

1. Marc Brunelle University of Ottawa marc.brunelle@uottawa.ca Institute of Phonetics, Cologne, June 7 2010 Tonal coarticulation in Northern and Southern Vietnamese

2. The Northern Vietnamese (NVN) tone system

3. The Southern Vietnamese (SVN) tone system Back to discussion

4. Tonal coarticulation • The physical realization of a tone varies depending on its environment • Neighboring tones • Intonation • Vowels and consonants • Example: In Vietnamese, a mid-level tone starts higher after a rising tone than after a falling tone

5. Progressive coarticulation in tone huyền Female SVN Subject

6. Language-specific hypotheses • Coarticulation should be bidirectional as in other tone languages (Han and Kim 1974, Shen 1990, Gandour et al. 1994, Brunelle 2003) • There should be more progressive than regressive coarticulation in NVN (Han and Kim 1974, Brunelle 2003) • Similar results in Thai (Gandour et al. 1994) • Contours should be relatively stable (Han and Kim 1974, Brunelle 2003)

7. Hypotheses based on models of coarticulation • If a phonetic dimension is crowded, it should vary less (evidence from V-V and nasal coarticulation) • Supporting evidence (Manuel and Krakow 1984, Magen 1984, Cohn 1990, Choi 1995, Manuel 1999) • Conflicting evidence (Clumeck 1976, Han 2007) • If this is true of tonal coarticulation as well? • Pitch targets are less important in NVN than in SVN, because voice quality plays a perceptual role role in NVN tones (Vũ 1981, 1982, Brunelle 2006) • Because of the lesser role of voice quality in SVN, contours should be less variable Dialect A Dialect B Tone 1 Tone 1 (modal voice)  F0 Tone 2 Tone 2 (creaky voice)

8. The recordings • 5 NVN speakers (3 women, 2 men) • 6 SVN speakers (3 women, 3 men) • Read the syllable /ma/ with all tones after the vowel /ɨ/ bearing all tones. • Frame sentences are half-realistic as strange first names were coined for the experiment. • Meaningful: Đểtôi nóichữmạxemôngđócóhiểukhông. Let me say the word ‘riceseedling’ to see if that man understands. • Borderline: ĐểtôichàosưMaxemôngấycónhớtôikhông. Let me greet monk Ma to see if he remembers me. • 36 (NVN) or 25 (SVN) frame sentences read 10 times each.

9. Results: direction of coarticulation • Impressionistically, there is more progressive than anticipatory coarticulation in all speakers Female SVN speaker Anticipatory, in ngang Progressive, in ngang

10. Results: A tone in which voice quality is crucial • When voice quality is a central phonetic cue, pitch varies more (extreme example) Male NVN speaker Anticipatory, in nặng Progressive, in nặng

11. Quantification of coarticulation • The vowels /ɨ/ and /a/ and the intervening /m/ are measured at 5 equidistant points • General linear model analysis for each dialect (modified from Gandour et al. 1994) • Dependant variable • F0 of 5 measurement points of each tone before all tones (anticipatory coarticulation) • F0 of 5 measurement points of each tone after all tones (progressive coarticulation) • Factors • Speaker • F0 at edge of adjacent vowel • onset of V2 for anticipatory • offset of V1 for progressive

12. Strength of coarticulation (in F values) Anticipatory Progressive NVN SVN

13. Summary of results (language-specific hypotheses) • Stronger coarticulation in NVN than in SVN • Bi-directional coarticulation, assimilatory in both directions • Different from Thai (Gandour et al. 1994) • Stronger progressive than anticipatory coarticulation in both dialects, but: • Much more short-distance progressive than anticipatory coarticulation • Slightly more long-distance anticipatory than progressive coarticulation • Would the effect be stronger in real speech? (wordlist effect)

14. Discussion: the role of voice quality • Voice quality in NVN tones allows more variation in pitch without risk of confusion Hence more coarticulation • The strength of coarticulation seems predictable from patterns of contrast (Manuel and Krakow 1984)

15. Discussion: Anticipatory vs. Progressive ? X • Two types of coarticulation (Perkell and Chiang 1996) • Long-distance anticipatory coarticulation is due to planning on the part of the speaker • Start early but don’t blur tonal contrasts! • Short-distance progressive coarticulation is due to immediate physical constraints • You can’t jump from 100 to 200 Hz in 5 milliseconds! • Other types of phonetic dimensions and other languages favor anticipatory coarticulation.

16. Discussion: Why is there more progressive coarticulation? • Rises and drops in pitch are often delayed (Ohala 1978) • Universal constraints… • A foresighted speaker could plan ahead and anticipate… • Tone onsets are less distinct than tone offsets, so blurring is less costly from a communicative point of view • A language with more variation at tone onsets than tone offsets should exhibit stronger anticipatory coarticulation Tone charts

17. Conclusion • Two types of assimilatory co-articulation in NVN and SVN • Long-distance anticipatory co-articulation • The speaker is anticipating the following tone • Short-distance progressive co-articulation • Physical constraints on pitch production; transitions cannot be too abrupt • The functional load of pitch determines the extent of coarticulation • NVN has pitch and voice quality: more co-articulation • SVN has pitch only: less co-articulation • The direction of coarticulation is determined by the tonal targets

18. Marc Brunelle marc.brunelle@uottawa.ca HạKiềuPhương kha@smail.uni-koeln.de Martine Grice martine.grice@uni-koeln.de Intonation in Northern Vietnamese Institute of Phonetics, Cologne June 7, 2010

19. An old question... • Communicative functions • Markers (morphemes, particles, …) • Sentence restructuring • Intonation • How do yourealize intonation when lexical toneisalreadymaking use of f0? • A bit Eurocentric, yetvery relevant typologically

20. Intonation in East Asiantonelanguages • Strategy 1: Boundarytonesalternatewith lexical tones • All tones in the sametier X X X X X X X X X X %H H L L H H L H L H%

21. Intonation in East Asiantonelanguages • Strategy 2: Superposition of intonation over lexical tone • Upward/Downward shift • Expansion/Compression • Theseeffectscouldbeeither global or local %q-raise X X X X X X X X H L L H H L H L

22. Previouswork on intonation in East Asiantonelanguages • Mandarin • Bothboundarytones and superposition (Peng et al. 2005, Shih 1988) • Superposition only(Xu 1999, Yuan et al. 2002, Yuan 2004, 2006) • Cantonese • Boundarytonesonly(Wong et al. 2005) • Superposition only(Fox et al. 2008) • Thai • Evidence for boundarytones, but overriden by lexical tones(Pittayawat 2007) Weneed data on more languages if wewant to do serioustypology

23. Normal ways of expressing communicative functions in VN • Final particles (common in East Asia) • Grammatical functions • Yes-no question Trangđi làmkhông? • ImperativeTrangđi làmđi! • Pragmaticfunctions • Confirmation Trangđi làmđấy. • Suggestion Trangđi làmnhá! • Paraphrasing and context • As in anyotherlanguage

24. Intonation in Vietnamese: Instrumental studies • Global f0 variation • Globallylower/higher f0 (Đỗ et al. 1998; Nguyễn and Boulakia 1999) • Local f0 variation • Pitch range expansion in stressedsyllables(Đỗ et al. 1998) • Higher pitch on focussedconstituents(Jannedy 2007, 2008) • Higher pitch on sentence-final question markers (Nguyễn and Boulakia 1999; Vũ et al. 2006) • Analysed as boundarytones(Hạ and Grice 2010) • Intensity(Nguyễn and Boulakia 1999) • Imperativeslouderthandeclaratives • Duration(Nguyễn and Boulakia 1999) • Questions shorterthandeclaratives • Non-instrumental observations on Northern(Thompson 1965) and SouthernVietnamese(Trần 1967)

25. Why one more study? • Previousstudieslookedat frame sentences • … not controlled for segments, tones or syntactic structures (Đỗ et al. 1998) • … controlled for tone and segments, but onlypartly for syntactic structure (Nguyễn and Boulakia 1999) • … controlled for tones, but not for segments and syntactic structure (Vũ et al. 2006) • Our study uses simpler sentences, but controls for tones, segments and syntactic structures.

26. Research questions • Whichintonationalcues are predominant in NorthernVietnamese? • Pitch • Global or local? • Intensity • Duration • Is intonation realizedthrough the addition of tones or through superposition (or both)? • How much inter-speaker variation do wefind?

27. Methods: Wordlist • 6 sentences, all 4-words long • First 3 words: Always SVO with constant tone • Không [xo͡ŋm] isalways the last word (« only » or yes-no question marker) • The sentences can have 4 differentmeanings, depending on the intonation • Ex: Tyăn cơm không • Declarative : Tyonlyeatsrice. • Annoyeddeclarative: Tyonlyeatsrice. (I justtoldyou!) • Yes-no question: DoesTyeatrice? • Command question: Ty, willyoueatyourrice?! Declar. Unmarked Questions Emphasis

28. Methods: Subjects and elicitation • 8 native speakers recorded in Hanoi • 3 men, 5 women • Speakers wererequested to produce the sentences appropriatelyaccording to givencontexts • Not a trivial task! • Each sentence wasrecordedthree times • 6 tones X 4 communicative functions X 3 repetitions: 72 sentences

29. Methods: Data processing • Sentences labelled and measured in Praat • Each sentence divided into 4 syllables • Each syllable measured at 5 equidistant points • Data inspected for doubling, halving and irregular vocal fold vibrations

30. Methods: Statisticalanalysis • Statistical analysis: GLMs in PASW (SPSS 18) • Conducted independently for each subject • Dependant variables at each sampling point • Duration • f0 • Intensity • Independent variables • Tone • Communicative function • Interaction

31. Results: Pitch range • No cleardifferencebetweencomm. functions • f0 range expandsfrom 1st to 3rdsyll. • Likely due to coarticulation ratherthan intonation

32. Results: Pitch Questions have a final rise No clear contrast between questions and declaratives Emphaticfunctionshigherthantheir non-emphaticcounterparts Questions are high Emphasis No specialemphasis Declaratives have a final fall Declaratives are low

33. Speaker variation in intonational f0 • Global effect: Higheroverall f0… • …for questions than for declaratives: 5/8 speakers • Frequency code (Ohala 1983) • …for emphaticthan for unmarked: 6/8 speakers • Effort code (Gussenhoven 2004) • Local effect on last syllable • Clearriseat the end of the question marker « không »: 3/8 speakers • Higher pitch at the end of « không » in questions: 1 more speaker (Total 4/8) • Clearfallat the end of the declarative: 4/8 speakers

34. Results: Intensity Annoyeddeclarativehigher than normal declarative Command question higher than normal question • Higherintensity in emphaticfunctions • Effort code again • Consistent for 4/8 speakers • Incr. contrasttowards end of sentence • No systematicdividebetween questions and declaratives

35. Results: Duration • There are stat. sign. durationaldifferences in all speakers… • …but they are not consistent across speakers • Significantdifferences are not always on the samesyllables • The differences do not always go in the same direction

36. Results: Summary • Strategies for marking communicative functions are variable across Hanoi speakers • Robust • Higheroverall pitch marks either questions or emphasis • Common • Final rise for questions/Final fall for declaratives • Higherintensity (esp. sentence final) marks emphasis • Inconsistent • Durationseems speaker-specific

37. Responses to research questions • Whichintonationalcues are predominant in VN? • Pitch • Optionalintensitycontrasts • Is intonation realizedthrough the addition of tones or through superposition (or both)? • Superposition issystematic • Focal tones are common, but optional • How much inter-speaker variation do wefind? • A lot. Why?

38. Conclusions • Variousintonationalstrategiesavailable for communicative functions • Nonetheless, intonation plays a more subtlerolethan in non-tonal languages • Almostnull for 2/8 speakers despite the exaggerated nature of the experimentaltask • Intonation is not grammaticalized. Rather, universaltendenciesemerge • Frequency and effort codes

39. Whereit all links up • Intonation in SouthernVietnamese • f0 seems more important in tonal contrasts: couldthat affect intonation? • Lessleeway for f0 variation??? • Fewer and lessfrequent final particles • Intonation couldbeexpected to be more important for marking communicative functions