Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <fox
linguistlist.org>
Dear all, I've got a question with regards to word length in syllables as a psycholinguistic variable. When 2 words in a psycholinguistic study or a speech therapist's session are said to have the same number of syllables, what does this actually mean? Is the property that they have in common a physical, i.e. a phonetic one, for example that they'd take the same amount of time to pronounce? Or is it something in a person's internal representation of the words which is the same? The language in question is Italian, and the particular subgroup of words which I'm puzzled about are those which contain a sequence of 2 or more vowels. There are syllabification rules by which 2 vowels will generally go into separate syllables (e.g. museo museum syllabifies as mu.se.o '' this vowel combination is called hiatus), unless one or both of the 2 vowels is a u or an i (e.g. continuare to continue syllabifies as con.ti.nua.re '' this combination is called diphtong). There's other rules covering accented vowels and combinations of 3 vowels. I'm not sure of what sort these rules are, orthographic or phonological or psychological, in any case, native speakers didn't agree on the number of syllables of words containing such vowel sequences when I gave them a list of these words (to syllabify from an intuitive point of view), and were also unsure of their own answers. (Some examples of uncertain words are: amicizia, ebraico, riapre, spiava, restituire, zione, influenza, paurosa, proibisce, violette, coinvolta, aree, fluido, invi�). So, word length in syllables is not necessarily always an independent psychologically real variable, but it seems that neither is it always physically real: fluente (2 syllables), for example, doesnt take less time to produce than poeta (3 syllables). Is word length in number of syllables as a psycholinguistic variable meaningful only in certain phonological contexts? Am I missing something? The reason why I'm asking about this is that I'm annotating a database of Italian words with certain linguistic variables so that it can be used as a tool for the generation of word lists in speech therapy and psycholinguistic research. So of course I want to be clear on what I'm doing. Any thoughts and advice are greatly appreciated, and I'll send a summary. Thank you very much, Anke Boewe IRCCS Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy Subject-Language: Italian; Code: ITNMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Dear Linguists, it's common in the phonetic literature (e.g. John Laver (1994) ''Principles of Phonetics'': 175, Cambridge University Press) to see click consonants (velaric ingressive sounds) described as rare as contrastive units, but common paralinguistically. I'm aware of their phonological distribution, but I don't know of any detailed survey of paralinguistic usage. In (British) English we have two paralinguistic clicks: the dental click ([/]), written as either ''tut'' or ''tsk'', and the lateral click ([//]), which as far as I'm aware has no written form. The dental ''tut/tsk'' usually occurs doubled, i.e. as ''tut tut'' or ''tsk tsk'' to indicate disapproval. The lateral click (also doubled) is the sound made to encourage a horse to move. There is, of course, also the bilabial click ([0]) which is a kiss. I don't include this as paralinguistic, because it is what it symbolises. I'd like to conduct as wide a cross-linguistic survey as possible to determine: 1) whether clicks are widely used paralinguistically; 2) which clicks are used paralinguistically; 3) what the click sounds symbolise; 4) whether 'doubling' of the click is common, e.g. as in English ''tut tut''. I'd also like to hear about writing conventions for the paralinguistic clicks. Does English have a preference for ''tut'' or ''tsk'', does [//] have a written form? What do other languages do? I'd be very grateful if list users would contribute any information on their native or near-native languages to me at the following mail address (set up to keep my university mail volume down): paralinguistic_clicksMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuehotmail.com I'll post a summary, but I'd like to give users a few weeks to respond. Many thanks! Mark Jones Department of Linguistics University of Cambridge mjj13
cam.ac.uk