Limits of prosody in Turkish

This paper claims that certain syntactic structures and information structural content are not always directly encoded in the prosodic representation of Turkish utterances. That syntax is mirrored rather limitedly in prosody is observed in isolated parentheticals which are prosodically realized identically to syntactically integrated constituents such as subjects and objects. That information structure has a limited effect on F0 variation is evidenced in utterances containing multiple foci; they display the same F0 pattern as allnew utterances or utterances with narrow focus. Thus, neither the informative status (topic/focus/neutral) nor the syntactic status (sentential/extra-sentential) of a constituent licenses a pre-specified phonetic correlate for focus and topic in Turkish. To explain the relationship between information structure and prosody in Turkish, one requires an account that appeals to the alignment of relevant items to certain prosodic positions at the level of the Phonological Phrase. In this article, general characteristics of the prosodic units within a Turkish Intonation Phrase are described. An information structure-free inventory of a Turkish Intonation Phrase is developed. This study concludes that what intonation languages such as English and German convey with pitch-accent placement is conveyed through prosodic phrasing strategies and boundary tone placement in Turkish, which is a characteristic of phrase languages.

___

Arnhold, A. (2012). Prosodic structure and focus realization in West Greenlandic. In S. A. Jun (Eds.), Prosodic typology II: The new development in the phonology of intonation and phrasing (tentative title), Oxford, OUP.

Bolinger, D. L. (1958). A theory of pitch accent in English. Word 14, 109-149.

Bolinger, D. L. (1989). Intonation and its uses: Melody in grammar and discourse. Stanford: Uni. Press.

Büring, D. (1997). The meaning of topic and focus: The 59th Street bridge accent. London: Routledge.

De Vries, M. (2007). Invisible constituents? Parentheses as B-merged adverbial phrases. In N. Dehé & Y. Kavalova (Eds.), Parentheticals (pp. 203-234). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Döring, S. (2007). Quieter, faster, lower, and set off by pauses? Reflections on prosodic aspects of parenthetical constructions in modern German. In N. Dehé & Y. Kavalova (Eds.), Parentheticals 285-307. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dehé, N. (2009). Clausal parentheticals, intonational phrasing, and prosodic theory. Journal of Linguistics, 45, 569-615.

Dehé, N. and Kavalova, Y. (2007). Parentheticals: An introduction. In N. Dehé & Y. Kavalova (Eds.), Parentheticals (pp. 1-22). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Demircan, Ö. (1996). Türkçenin sesdizimi [The phonology of Turkish]. Istanbul: Der Yay.

Elfner, E. (2012). Syntax-prosody interactions in Irish. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Erguvanlı, E. (1979). The function of word order in Turkish grammar. Doctoral Dissertation, UCLA.

Erguvanlı Taylan, E. (1984). The function of word order in Turkish grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Erteschik-Shir, N. (1997). The dynamics of focus structure. Cambridge: University Press.

Féry, C. (1993). German intonational patterns. Linguistische Arbeiten 285. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Féry, C. (2008). Syntax, information structure, embedded prosodic phrasing and the relational scaling of pitch accents. Unpublished manuscript.

Féry, C. (2010). The intonation of Indian languages: An areal phenomenon. In I. Hasnain & S. Chaudhury (Eds.), Festschrift in honour of Ramakant Agnihotri. Güliz Güneş 167

Féry, C., & Samek-Lodovici, V. (2006). Focus projection and prosodic prominence in nested foci. Language, 82(1),131150.

Fukumori, T. (2004). An experimental phonetics study of vowel harmony in Turkish. Doctoral Dissertation. (Published by Bensei Shuppan, University of Tsukuba).

Göksel, A. (1998). Linearity, focus and the postverbal position in Turkish. In J. L. Johanson (Ed.), The Mainz meeting: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Turkish linguistics (pp. 85106). Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden,

Göksel, A., Kabak, B., & Revithiadou, A. (2013). Prosodically constrained non-local doubling. The Linguistic Review, 30.

Göksel, A. and Özsoy, S. (2000). Is there a focus position in Turkish? In A. Göksel & C. Kerslake (Eds.), Studies on Turkish and Turkic languages: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Turkish linguistics (pp. 219228). Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden.

Göksel, A., & Özsoy, S. (2003). dA as a focus/topic associated clitic in Turkish. In S. Özsoy & A. Göksel (Eds.), Lingua, Special edition on Focus in Turkish, 1143-1167.

Göksel, A., & C. Kerslake. (2005). Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.

Güneş, G. (2012). Prosodic parentheticals and prosodic integration: A case study in Turkish. Unpublished manuscript, University of Groningen.

Güneş, G. (2013). On the role of prosodic constituency in Turkish. The proceedings of WAFL8, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics. Cambridge, MA.

Hulst, H. van der. (2002). Stress and accent. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (Vol. 4, pp. 246254). London: Nature Publishing Group.

Hulst, H. van der, & Weijer, J. van de. (1991). Topics in Turkish phonology. In H. Boeschoten & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Turkish linguistics today (pp. 1159). Leiden: Brill.

Inkelas, S., & Orgun, C. O. (1998). Level (non)ordering in recursive morphology: evidence from Turkish. In S. G. Lapointe, D. K. Brentari & P. M. Farrell (Eds.), Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax (pp. 360-410). Stanford: CSLI.

İpek, C. (2011). Phonetic realization of focus with no on-focus pitch range expansion in Turkish. In Proceedings of the 17th international congress of phonetic sciences.

İşsever, S. (2003). Information structure in Turkish: The word order-prosody interface. Lingua, 113(11), 1025-1053.

İvoseviç, S. (2011). Bürün, bilgi yapısı ve sözcük dizilişi etkileşimi: Türkçe-Sırpça örneği. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Ensitüsü.

Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantics in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Jun, S.-A. (2005). Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford University Press.

Jun, S.-A. (2012). Prosodic typology revisited: Adding macro-rhythm. In The proceedings of speech prosody, 6th international conference, Shanghai, China.

Kabagema-Bilan, E., LÛpez-JimÈnez, B., & Truckenbrodt, H. (2011). Multiple focus in Mandarin Chinese. Lingua, 121(13), 1890-1905.

Kabak, B., & Vogel, I. (2001). The phonological word and stress assignment in Turkish. Phonology, 18, 315-360.

Kabak, B., & Revithiadou, A. (2009). An interface approach to prosodic word recursion. In J. Grijzenhout & B. Kabak (Eds.), Phonological domains: Universals and deviations. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kamali, B. (2011). Topics at the PF interface of Turkish. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Harvard University.

Kan, S. (2009). Prosodic domains and the syntax-prosody mapping in Turkish. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Boğaziçi University.

Karlsson, A. (to appear). Intonation in Halh Mongolian. In Sun-Ah. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic typology II: The new development in the phonology of intonation and phrasing (tentative title), OUP.

Karlsson, A. M., Svantesson, J-O., & House, D. (2012). Adaptation of focus to lexical tone and phrasing in Kammu. In Proceedings of the third international symposium on tonal aspects of languages. Nanjing, China, O3-01.

Kılıçaslan, Y. (2004). Syntax of information structure in Turkish. Linguistics, 42, 717 765.

Konrot, A. (1981). Physical correlates of linguistic stress in Turkish. University of Sussex Language Centre Occasional Papers, 24, 26-52.

Ladd, R. D. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge University Press.

Levi, S. (2005). Acoustic correlates of lexical accent in Turkish. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 35, 73-97.

Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish grammar. New York: Oxford University Press (2nd Edition).

Nespor, M., & Vogel I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Foris, Dordrecht

Özge, U. (2003). A tune-based account of Turkish information structure. Unpublished Masters thesis. Middle East Technical University.

Özge, U. (2012). Notes on focus projection in Turkish. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Turkish linguistics, August 2010, Szeged, Hungary.

Özge, U., & Bozşahin, C. (2010). Intonation in the grammar of Turkish. Lingua, 120, 132-175.

Öztürk, Ö. (2005). Modeling phoneme durations and fundamental frequency contours in Turkish speech. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Middle East Technical University.

Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Doctoral Dissertation. MIT, Cambridge, MA. (Published in 1987 by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington).

Pierrehumbert, J., & Beckman, M. (1988). Japanese tone structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In P.R. Cohen, J. Morgan, & M.E. Pollock (Eds.). Intentions in communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Potts, C. (2005). The logic of conventional implicatures. In Oxford studies in theoretical linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rump, H. H., & Collier, R. (1996). Focus conditions and the prominence of pitchaccented syllables. Language and Speech, 39,1-17.

Samek-Lodovici, V. (2005). Prosody-syntax interaction in the expression of focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23, 687755.

Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. In Phonology Yearbook, 3 (pp. 371-405).

Selkirk, E. (1995). The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Beckman, L. Walsh Dickey, & S. Urbanczyk (Eds.), Papers in optimality theory (pp. 439-470). Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.

Selkirk, E. (2005). Comments on intonational phrasing. In S. Frota, M. Vigario, & M. J. Freitas (Eds.), Prosodies (pp. 1158). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Selkirk, E. (2009). On clause and intonational phrase in Japanese: the syntactic grounding of prosodic constituent structure. Gengo Kenkyu, 136, 35-74.

Sezer, Ε. (1981). On non-final stress in Turkish. Journal of Turkish Studies, 5, 61-69.

Steedman, M. (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 649689.

Truckenbrodt, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. MIT.

Üntak-Tarhan, A. (2006). Topics in syntax-phonology interface in Turkish: Sentential stress and phases. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Boğaziçi University.

Wagner, M., & Watson, D. G. (2010). Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25:7-9, 905-945.