Discourse Intonation and Information Structure: An Empirical Study of Existential There Constructions in Non-native Spontaneous Speech

Baker, Rachel Elizabeth. 2010. The acquisition of English focus marking by non-native speakers. (Doctoral dissertation). Northwestern University.Search in Google Scholar

Baumann, Stefan–Martine Grice. 2006. The intonation of accessibility. Journal of Pragmatics 38(10): 1636–1657.10.1016/j.pragma.2005.03.017Search in Google Scholar

Boersma, Paul–David Weenink. 2016. PRAAT: Doing phonetics by computer. http://www.praat.orgSearch in Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne. 2007. Rethinking the role of communicative competence in language teaching. In: E. Alcón Soler, M. P. Safont Jordà (eds), Intercultural language use and language learning, 41–57. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-5639-0_3Search in Google Scholar

Celce-Murcia, Marianne–Dörnyei, Zoltán–Thurrell, Sarah. 1995. Communicative competence: a pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics 6(2): 5–35.10.5070/L462005216Search in Google Scholar

Chafe, Wallace. 2001. The analysis of discourse flow. In: Schiffrin, Deborah, Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton (eds), The handbook of discourse analysis, 673–687. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Search in Google Scholar

Chun, Dorothy M. 1998. Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language Learning and Technology 2(1): 61–77.Search in Google Scholar

2002. Discourse intonation in L2: from theory and research to practice. Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Cooper, Nicole–Cutler, Anne–Wales, Roger. 2002. Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and Speech 45: 207–28.10.1177/00238309020450030101Search in Google Scholar

Cutler, Anne–Wales, Roger–Cooper, Nicole–Janssen, Joris H. 2007. Dutch listeners’ use of suprasegmental cues to English stress. In: Trouvain, J., Barry, W. J. (eds), Proceedings of the 16^th International Congress of Phonetics Sciences, 1913–1916. Dudweiler: Pirrot.Search in Google Scholar

Engen, Kristin J. Van–Baese-Berk, Melissa–E. Baker, Rachel–Choi, Arim–Kim, Midam–R. Bradlow, Ann. 2010. The Wildcat Corpus of native- and foreign-accented English: communicative efficiency across conversational dyads with varying language alignment profiles. Language and Speech 53(4): 510–540.10.1177/0023830910372495Search in Google Scholar

Gorjian, Bahman–Hayati, Abdolmajid–Pourkhoni, Parisa. 2013. Using Praat software in teaching prosodic features to EFL learners. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 84: 34–40.10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.505Search in Google Scholar

Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2004. The Phonology of tone and intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511616983Search in Google Scholar

Hardison, Debra M. 2004. Generalization of computer-assisted prosody training: quantitative and qualitative findings. Language Learning and Technology 8(1): 34–52.Search in Google Scholar

Hirschberg, Julia–Gravano, Agustín–Nenkova, Ani–Sneed, Elisa–Ward, Gregory. 2007. Intonational overload: uses of the downstepped (H*! H* -L %) contour in read and spontaneous speech. Laboratory Phonology 9: 455–482.Search in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2000. The phonology of English as an international language: new models, new norms, new goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kaltenboeck, Gunther. 2001. A multimedia approach to suprasegmentals: using a CD-ROM for English intonation teaching. Proceedings of Phonetics Teaching & Learning Conference.Search in Google Scholar

Kang, Okim–Rubin, Don–Pickering, Lucy. 2010. Suprasegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English. Modern Language Journal 94: 554–566.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01091.xSearch in Google Scholar

Lai, Yuwen. 2008. Acoustic realization and perception of English lexical stress by Mandarin learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas.Search in Google Scholar

Lecumberri, Maria Luisa Garcia–Cooke, Martin–Cutler, Anne. 2010. Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: a review. Speech Communication 52(11–12): 864–886.10.1016/j.specom.2010.08.014Search in Google Scholar

Lennes, Mietta. 2011. SpeCT – The Speech Corpus Toolkit for Praat. http://www.helsinki.fi/~lennes/praat-scripts/ (1 January, 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Levis, John M.–Pickering, Lucy. 2004. Teaching intonation in discourse using speech visualization technology. System 32: 505–524.10.1016/j.system.2004.09.009Search in Google Scholar

Major, Roy C. 2001. Foreign accent: the ontogeny and philogeny of second language phonology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.10.4324/9781410604293Search in Google Scholar

Mennen, Ineke. 2004. Bi-directional interference in the intonation of Dutch speakers of Greek. Journal of Phonetics 32: 543–563.10.1016/j.wocn.2004.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Munro, Murray J.–M. Derwing, Tracey. 1999. Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning 49(Supplement 1): 285–310.Search in Google Scholar

Nagy, Judit 2009. Magyar nyelvtanulók angol lexikai hangsúlyának akusztikai vizsgálata [An acoustic phonetic study of Hungarian language learners’ lexical stress]. In: Váradi, Tamás (ed.), Alkalmazott Nyelvészeti Doktorandusz Konferencia 3: 87–98. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet.Search in Google Scholar

2014. The use of speech visualization technology in prosody teaching. In: Varga, Cristina (ed.), New trends in language didactics: Noi direcţii în didactica limbilor, 95–107. Cluj: Presa Universitară Clujeană.Search in Google Scholar

2015. The use of intonational cues marking new information in non-native speech. EduLingua 2(1): 1–14.10.14232/edulingua.2015.2.1Search in Google Scholar

(forthcoming). Features of native and non-native spontaneous speech presenting new information. Proceedings of the 6^th ELLE International Conference on English Language and Literatures in English. Oradea: Romania: Partium Christian University.Search in Google Scholar

Pajak, Bozena–Levy, Roger. 2014. The role of abstraction in non-native speech perception. Journal of Phonetics 46: 147–160.10.1016/j.wocn.2014.07.001Search in Google Scholar

Pickering, Lucy. 2004. The structure and function of intonational paragraphs in native and non-native speaker instructional discourse. English for Specific Purposes 23(1): 19–43.10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00020-6Search in Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, Janet Breckenridge. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar

Prince, Ellen F. 1992. The ZPG letter: subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In: Mann, William C., Thompson, Sandra A. (eds), Discourse description: diverse analyses of a fund raising text, 295–325. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.16.12priSearch in Google Scholar

Sadowsky, Scott. 2016. Massive Speech Corpus Tool (MaSCoT) 2.4. http://sadowsky.cl/praat.html.Search in Google Scholar

Schafer, Amy J.–R. Speer, Shari–Warren, Paul–White, S. David. 2000. Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29(2): 169–182.10.1023/A:1005192911512Search in Google Scholar

Sennema, Anke, R.–van de Vijver S. E., Carroll–Zimmer-Stahl, A. 2005. Focus accent, word length and position as cues to L1 and L2 word recognition. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 03: 183–198.Search in Google Scholar

Tanner, Mark–M. Landon, Melissa. 2009. The effects of computer-assisted pronunciation readings on ESL learners’ use of pausing, stress, intonation, and overall comprehensibility. Language Learning and Technology 13(3): 51–65.Search in Google Scholar

Trouvain, Jurgen–Gut, Ulrike (eds). 2007. Non-native prosody: phonetic description and teaching practice. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110198751Search in Google Scholar

Vaissière, Jacqueline. 2008. Perception of intonation. The handbook of speech perception, 236–263. doi:10.1002/9780470757024.ch10.10.1002/9780470757024.ch10Search in Google Scholar

Venditti, Jennifer J.–Hirschberg, Julia. 2003. Intonation and discourse processing. Proceedings of ICPhS, Barcelona, 107–114.Search in Google Scholar

Vijver, Ruben van de–Sennema, Anke–Zimmer–Stahl, Anne. 2006. An analysis of pitch and duration in material used to test L2 processing of words. Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 00: 209–221.Search in Google Scholar

Ward, Gregory–J. Birner, Betty. 2001. Discourse and information structure. In: Schiffrin, Deborah, Tannen, Deborah, Hamilton, Heidi (eds), Handbook of discourse analysis, 119–137. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Wennerstrom, Ann. 1994. Intonational meaning in English discourse: a study of non-native speakers. Applied Linguistics 15(4): 399–420.10.1093/applin/15.4.399Search in Google Scholar

Ying, H. G. 1996. Multiple constraints on processing ambiguous sentences: evidence from adult L2 learners. Language Learning 46(4): 681–711.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01356.xSearch in Google Scholar

Wildcat Corpus of Native- and Foreign-Accented English. http://groups.linguistics.northwestern.edu/speech_comm_group/wildcat/.Search in Google Scholar