Report on the panel "Prosodic Constructions of Dialog", at the 14th International Pragmatics Conference - Part 1

Report on the panel "Prosodic Constructions of Dialog", at the 14th International Pragmatics Conference - Part 1

I am currently " conference-crawling" and in an effort to be faithful to my second linguistic love, Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis (Pragma-Discourse), I spent six days at the International Pragmatics Conference .  I will be reporting on a fantastic panel I attended on Tuesday, in two installments .

The usual disclaimers: I am writing from my tablet so I am afraid there won't be many "special effects" and there will probably be a million typos. Plus, any misunderstanding of theoretical views is my own (attributable to jet lag?).

Last Tuesday I had the fabulous experience of attending twelve talks as part of a panel that dealt with " prosodic constructions", that is:

"Units of (phonetic and prosodic) organization that unite elements of linguistic form with elements of meaning, including affiliation and sequence management" (Ogden, 2010 as quoted by Szczepek-Reed, slide 2)

The panel was organised by Nigel Ward, Richard Ogden, Oliver Niebuhr and Nancy Hedberg, and you can read about it on this website .

I would like to briefly report what I have heard, and include some personal remarks about the presentations and the whole experience, starting with the fact that the organisers came up with a fantastic idea of not only allotting the usual 5 min Q&A, but also a whole 15-minute slot for open discussion with the audience. This really made all the difference, in comparison to other panels l have attended .

First session: Compositional and Constructional Aspects of Prosody
Yi Xu et al opened the panel with a very passionate presentation of a piece of software (PENTAtrainer2 - this link goes to the first version) that allows the decomposition of different prosodic elements and their reassembly, by "extracting global patterns as sequence of local targets". This is done through easy annotation and coding of issues such as stress, pitch height and slope, "focus" (his use of the word in fact is what we understand as nucleus placement that is, phonetic rather than informational, if I understood his account correctly - he does not appear to make a distinction between  the informational and intonational choices at this stage), modality (something like voice quality), among other things. The tool and system presented comes as a result of extensive research and literature review.

The second presentation, by Nigel Ward, addressed "narrow pitch regions" (the Bookended-Narrow Pattern), which the author associated with a " squished down pitch range" that appears to take place in some occasions in which speakers express contrast, complaint, grudging admiration and contradiction (Sorry, but I got a sudden flashback to O'Connor and Arnold, especially because of the wyrd "grudgingly"). This pitch range area is problematic for analysts as it is too subtle, and there is an interplay of multiple prosodic constructions which are superimposed. This pattern is presented as being used to " introduce specific personal knowledge and invite the interlocutor to consider it". (Aug 28th, update: The presenter has shared with me teaching resources on his research on prosodic constructions: http://www.cs.utep.edu/nigel/patterns/)

This presentation opened up a very interesting debate regarding the definition of functions, prescriptiveness, the role of context in determining that these prosodic choices may "stand for" and the establishment of categories (Whose? The analysts'? The participants'?) Clearly this is an issue that marks interactivists apart from other approaches (and the one I enjoy the most; the actual possibility of describing what actions speakers appear to be implementing through prosody, and how,  instead of presenting generalisations - which, on the other hand, I have to do because of my job!)

The last presenter in this session was Oliver Niebuhr, who focused on Laboratory data, and the factors that affect elicitation (including issues like time of day and type of font used in the text, apart from the usual factors we may know about). The presenter proposed new elicitation techniques (under the name INSPECT) to enable the retrieval of data that could resemble the characteristics of spontaneous speech more closely. Those of us "interactionalists" (in the making,  at least, for myself) will always prefer naturally occurring data, but it was granted by the author that laboratory speech is  a "natural reaction to a controlled environment".

The ensuing discussion was truly enlightening, a bit fiery for some (and yet everyone was so respectful!). One of the contributions by the discussant, Richard Ogden, was very clear in terms of the fact that this this form- function issue could be delimited in terms of the difference between something having a phonetic exponent, versus phonetic structure having meaning.


Session 2: Prosodic Constructions and Turn-Taking

Jan Gorisch et al describe an experience of replication of a study by Kurtic et al 2013 on overlapping talk and whether the instances identified in the corpus of multiparty conversation could be said to be competitive or non-competitive. In this occasion,  the tokens were rated in terms of (non) competition by different raters, and also subjected to a Decision Tree.  It had been established in previous studies that prosodic matching was related to interactional alignment, and this presentation finds a relation between position in the previous TCU where the overlap starts, the duration of overlapping talk, and the pitch span with issues of turn (non) competitiveness.. (Found this presentation particularly interesting, since it is closely related to my MA thesis, BTW)

Stevanovic and Lennes present a study that is aimed at connecting pitch matching -absolute and relative- to the notion of agency. This latter concept, apparently related to issues of sequential organization (later connected to levels of passivity-activity of the interlocutors, and also discourse control, in a more informal description of the concept) was presented as connected to matching and non-matching of speech. The discussion that followed introduced a few other issues that could affect levels of agency, such as backchannel practices that may require a lower level of agency.

De Ruiter commented on a 2006 study which over the years has become quite polemic (but which could not be refuted, according to the presenter), regarding the apparent lack of speaker's reliance on pitch to decide on possible TCU ends. The experiment consisted in presenting subjects with natural and synthetic turns, first with words and pitch, then with "blurred" words, then noise, for them to press a button when a TCU appeared to be reaching a potential end. The ensuing discussion introduced the possibility of other variables that may "do the trick" at TCU boundaries, such as lentghening and rhythm.

Not only was it a fabulous panel, but it was also a sort of a dream come true for me, as you can imagine!

Coming up soon: part 2, and of course, PTLC!

Conference Report #1: III Jornadas de la Didáctica de la Fonética (UNSAM, August 29th, 30th - Sept 4th, ENSLV JRF)

I attended a truly enriching event two weeks ago: a conference on the teaching of Phonetics, called " III Jornadas de la Didáctica de la Fonética", at Universidad de San Martín and the "Post-Jornadas" at "ENSLV Juan Ramón Fernández".
This post will be an attempt at reporting some of the highlights of the conference, at least according to my own personal interests. The pictures of the slides are a bit blurry but you can enlarge them by clicking on them, at least.

The conference started with a recorded interview to Alan Cruttenden by Mgtr Roxana Basso, which tackled points such as the use of the label "General British" and the motivations behind that choice (which I'd seen Jack Windsor Lewis explore years ago here) and the current associations in the media with RP. Mgtr Basso also discussed the future of the so-called Estuary English, to which Cruttenden, as many such as Prof Wells have done, agrees it will not become a future standard or "replacement for RP" as some people have claimed. Some interesting bits that were mentioned that make instruction and priorities for pronunciation teaching different from the ones ELF may propose were related to the role of word stress and hesitation pauses, which help learners become "native sounding", if that is the aim. There were quite a number of interesting views in these 20 minutes, and I could not take them all down, but the videoconference by Basso-Cruttenden will be made available online soon, so I'll link to it HERE once it is online.


The opening panel was brilliant, and I particularly enjoyed the presentations by:

• Alejandro Renato, who is working on an "intonation map" of Argentinian accents of Spanish using Sp-ToBI, from a connectionist perspective of perception. Renato mentioned the complexities behind the study and systematisation of intonational features, including the effect of sonority and duration, for example, in the measurement and meanings of contours, the need for a consideration of a "microtonal" dimension, and the multiplicity of dimensions operating and the amount of different layers of info encoded in a single contour. Brilliant remarks included the fact that human processing time is not lineal, as we work on different "temporal windows". There was also a critical review of ToBI.

• Leopoldo Labastía, made a fantastic presentation on the ways we mark foreground and background information in Spanish and English through tone and focus (in my humble opinion, the best talk at the conference):

•  María Emilia Pandolfi, an expert in the Phonology of Italian, discussed different activities to make pronunciation work more significant, communicative and contextualised.

On Friday afternoon, I made the most of the talks by:

• Francisco Zabala, friend and brilliant colleague, who discussed ways of teaching Phonetics I from a top-down perspective. He has found that making students aware of stress, the contrast between content and function words, and the overwhelming presence of schwa, together with a few rules of thumb regarding spellings, can ensure student success in transcription and pronunciation.

• Marisol Hernández,  teacher and actress who discussed some ideas to relate our pronunciation work to drama, and made a point of how talking another language is a way of "staging something through our bodies" 

• Gonzalo Espinosa, Alejandra Dabrowski, Leopoldo Labastía from Universidad Nacional del Comahue reviewed the functions and intonation of cleft and pseudo-cleft sentences in English and Spanish and showed some great integrative materials for the Language and Phonetics lessons. I was truly inspired by the way they have managed to design instructional materials which place prosody in context and lead students towards using intonation naturally.

• Adriana Cáldiz et al from Universidad Nacional de La Plata who reviewed different theories relating politeness to prosodic choices.

And later, I also made my own presentation on
ways of teaching the prosodic configuration of instructional discourse, based on my 2013 research and on the type of work I have been doing on Systemic Functional Linguistics and Discourse Intonation in the last two years, with my Lab 3 and 4 and Phonetics 2 courses.

Saturday morning was also interesting, with inspiring talks by 

• Andrea Perticone, another colleague who has a great brain for Phonetics, particularly everything acoustic. She presented her preliminary findings on the way we hear tones, and particularly on what happens when there are "non-prototypical" tones, in our context, those tones that go beyond the "mould" presented by O'Connor and Arnold, which dominates our teaching of tones from an imitative perspective. There were thought-provoking remarks on micro-prosodic effects that need to be considered for pitch measurement (pitch scaling, intensity, duration, the temporal dimension) which ToBI may not consider; issues of stylisation and compression, and allotony. Looking forward to hearing more on this, it was great!

• Lucía Rivas and  Miriam Germani from Universidad Nacional de La Pampa, who are also working on the prosodic configurations of genre from a SFL perspective (they are like my intellectual soul-mates!). They discussed their experience teaching intonation and discourse, and the need to get away from mere taxonomies to engage in discourse analysis proper, not only discussing linguistic but also paralinguistic features of text ypes.

• Diana Martinez Salatín, who reported on an experiment relating pronunciation to transcription errors from interlanguage phonology theories.

There were also talks by colleagues from UNLP and UNCo stressing the importance of doing contextualised, significant dictation and pronunciation practice with authentic materials.

I missed the talks by Miriam Germani on Storytelling, and Ana Irazábal (Phonology FB page editor!) called "Funology", which I would have loved to attend, but concurrent sessions are like that.

***

On September 4th, the "Post Jornadas" took place at Lenguas Vivas Juan Ramón Fernández. My colleague Francisco Zabala made a presentation on the connections between phonetics and listening in our context of speakers of Riverplate Spanish learning English, and he reviewed some of the issues that affect comprehension and intelligibility. There were also some live comprehension experiments which proved how complex the whole process can be.

Almost a century of English pronunciation teaching in my country!

The next speaker was Patrick, a language assistant from the US, who commented on Upspeak, and some findings from the original paper on "Jeopardy" by Linneman. The presenter also made connections with political discourse and presented his own hypotheses on the matter.

Finally, another presentation by Andrea Perticone. This time, she discussed some connections between the Gestalt (notions of figure and ground) and issues of focus and tone in English, with clear examples and illustrative videos, very useful for learners. (And my intelligent phone run out of its unintelligent battery, which is why I don't have any pics, I am afraid :( )

***

Whenever I attend a conference, I generally feel excited about the networking, even more thrilled to learn new things, but I also cannot help feeling a bit miserable when I find that most of the research I do is self-imposed, non-funded, and that attending conferences generally means asking for the day off and getting that money discounted from my salary because the red tape in the City of Buenos Aires for us in tertiary education is just so impossible. 

Anyway, I believe this conference was brilliant, as I have found like-minded people doing work on prosody more even than before, and to see we all come from different places and traditions and still see eye to eye, and that we all "dared" trod the path of intonation and meaning, which many people fear so fiercely, was just inspiring, and I am really grateful for the experience.

So here's the bunch of us, like-minded Phonlings from ISP JVG, ENSLV JRF, UNCo and UNLPam phonetising over food! Obviously!

 ***

It is always the case with concurrent sessions that you miss out on a lot of presentations you would ehave liked to see, so I am not reporting on all the papers, obviously. If you are curious, the whole programme and presentation titles are available HERE. And I have made a summary of my live tweeting below:

Tools & Apps #1: Typing IPA symbols

Today: How to insert IPA fonts in a document, website, mobile device....and more!

(Disclaimer 1: I know there are lots of posts on this in pronunciation- and tech-related blogs, and there are many tools I am not reviewing here, which you can consult in my Scoop.It collection at the end of this post. I am just presenting the ones I myself have found useful, with the usual warnings and "user discretion" advice!)

(Disclaimer 2: I have tested these tools on a Windows 7 and a Windows 8 computer, and on mobile devices running Android 4.1 and Blackberry 10.2 versions. I cannot help those Mac/iOS users out there, I fear, though some of these may work on these systems as well.)

The easy way out

There are a number of "phonemic typewriters" on the web you may want to try out. In general, all you have to do is to click on the keys and transcribe your desired words/passage. You then select your transcribed text and copy and paste it on Word, on the Web, on Twitter, on Facebook, you name it!

• I have found David Brett's typewriter really useful when in a rush, for a basic broad transcription, though given some recent changes to GB you may not find all the symbols you need. 

• 
  

  • 

  David Brett's
  Pete McKichan's Phonemic Script Typewriter below works similarly.

  

  McKichan's

If you need to go for narrow transcription with different diacritics and symbols for other languages than English, you may try Typeit .






Weston Ruter uses the IPA chart to function as a typewriter. Great resource if you need to be reminded of the place and manner of articulation of the symbols you are typing, among other features:

Even easier? Think again!

Yes, dear students, we've known about these for YEARS! And I have trained my eye to recognise transcriptions using these tools. Because what matters in the end is the rule behind the use of a certain sound for a certain spelling, or the choice of a particular weak and strong form, these websites may not be "the coolest" thing to use (especially if you have to sit face-to-face exams, where your knowledge should come straight from your head!). So, yes, these resources may be time-saving, but not grade-savers in the end. So think twice before using them to complete your homework transcriptions. And if you do use them, check the transcriptions against your spelling and weak-strong form rules, trying to account for every bit transcribed, or attempting to spot "errors". 

(Now, having made my usual "witch lecturer" warning, off to reviewing these tools)

Some websites offer a text-to-pronunciation transcription. Yes, they do! I myself have used them to prepare some keys to transcriptions or dictations for my lessons, but found I had to use up quite a lot of that time I thought I'd saved correcting errors or making more suitable choices of pronunciation. 

One of the most popular among my students (Busted!) is PhoTransEdit. You can see from the capture what I mean about "correcting mistakes", but I have to admit it is one of the most accurate tools of this kind I've found so far in spite of some "horrors":

Lingorado offers a similar functionality, but uses /ɛ/ for British English /e/, and it also presents a few issues with weak and strong forms and happY, for instance:

***

Many of these have iPhone, Android and Windows 8 mobile versions, which makes IPA-typing on your mobile or tablet easier. Other mobile apps I have tried on Android and Blackberry 10 include:

Multiling Keyboard: I found this integrated keyboard hellish to use at first, but once I got used to it, I could type IPA really easily. You just need to get acquainted with the location of the symbols on the keyboard and learn some swift movements to make your choice, but the keyboard includes diacritics as well, and I believe all the trouble is worth it. I have produced transcription keys on the spot for my learners, typing almost at the same speed rate they were handwriting their symbols on the page!

Phoneme Converter: if you are familiar with the shortcuts for the IPA symbols to type on a PC (see below), then this tool is going to allow you to type really fast using ASCII-IPA (say, using the @ for /ə/, for example) in order to paste your text later anywhere on your mobile device. This is a capture of its use on a Blackberry 10 device, though it is in fact an Android app:

A bit more challenging, but worth it! 

Indeed, having the IPA fonts in your computer does make things easier for us, and yes, it does pose a bit of a challenge. But once you are over the initial struggle of download and installation, all you need to do is remember the codes to type those symbols that just "don't look like regular letters", so to speak.

• Where to download the fonts from:

SIL: http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&id=IPAhome

The IPA: http://www.langsci.ucl.ac.uk/ipa/ipafonts.html

UCL (includes also a phonetic keyboard):  http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/resource/phonetics/

• How to install the fonts

Some of the websites above present the fonts as "packages" which "self-install" the fonts with the only task of downloading and opening the file. Some others, however, require manual installation.

If that is the case, on a Windows computer, these are the usual steps:

1. Download your fonts, and if zipped, unzip them.

2. On the File Explorer, copy them (or select them and click "ctrl + C") as you would do with any file.

3. Open the Control Panel. Double click on "Fonts"

4. Paste your files (or click "ctrl + V")

That should do the trick!

• How to type the symbols

If you use a word processor, for instance, you just need to identify the name of your font and select it on the list of fonts,  in much the same way you change from Arial to Times New Roman, for example. 

The symbols that look like letters, so to speak, are typed directly, and if you need to consult the way of typing in the other "foreign-looking" symbols, you can check the article below:

http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/eureka-ipa.doc

(Mind you, there is a "logic" behind the system, with the velar nasal /ŋ/as a capital N (shift + n), the STRUT vowel /ʌ/ as a capital V, the NURSE vowel /ɜ/ by pressing "3", and so on! You'll be up to it in no time!)

Intonation

Regarding intonation, things may be a bit "rough", particularly if you use tonetic marks, unlike the conventions used for ToBI that use letters and some (*%!-+) symbols.
Those keyboard tools that offer diacritics do have tone marks you can use, and the fonts listed above also present a few, particularly the one on intonation at the UCL website.

At times, however, it appears to be more useful to use arrow marks with superscript and subscript formatting options . Some people  use slanted lines \ /, others, following the conventions of Discourse Intonation, place words on different lines to show key/termination variation.
These may be just some ways of coding your transcription for intonation, which will depend on your chosen theoretical framework.

Truth is, marking different levels of key and termination may prove a bit of a struggle. There are a few fonts going round, but as I cannot accurately trace the source, I cannot post them just yet. Should I get permission and a reliable source, I will make them available here, I promise! 

IPA tools: My bag of tricks

As usual, here's my full collection of resources to type IPA symbols.
http://www.scoop.it/t/pronunciation-bites/?tag=ipa+fonts
 The links to some of the resources reviewed here will be found in this collection, as well as many other tools I have not reviewed because of their price, effectiveness or accuracy. You can check them out and tell us about your own experience in the comments box below.

A final word

Being able to transcribe on your PC or your mobile gives you the chance of not only showing the pronunciation of a particular word or phrase on the spot, but also, and more importantly, it gives you the freedom to design your own flashcards, acrostics and other teaching materials on any web platform or piece of software. If you use the typewriters, for instance, you can also embed the symbols on Facebook, Twitter, and your blogs and platforms, allowing us "phonfreaks" to share knowledge or code "secret" messages for other "phon-nerds" worldwide!