Oliver Niebuhr 7th International Conference of Speech Prosody - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
oliver niebuhr 7th international conference of speech
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Oliver Niebuhr 7th International Conference of Speech Prosody - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 24, 2023 188 likes •388 views

Analysis of Spoken Language, Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University A little more ironic Voice quality and segmental reduction differences between sarcastic and neutral utterances Oliver Niebuhr 7th International Conference of

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

22.05.2014 1

“A little more ironic” –

Voice quality and segmental reduction differences between sarcastic and neutral utterances

Oliver Niebuhr

7th International Conference of Speech Prosody Dublin, Ireland Thursday, 22 May, 2014

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

 Ironic statements convey the opposite of what the speaker has put into words.   Since the number of ironic utterances is in principle infinite   Since the prosodic meanings have to be adjusted to clash with each of these verbal meanings  ...it is obvious that there cannot be THE prosody of irony  Phonetic analyses at least have to distinguish different subtypes of irony  The most frequently investigated subtype  clash between positive verbal and negative prosodic meanings = ‘sarcastic irony’‚   subject of the present study

Introduction

22.05.2014 2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

 Brief overview of (some) previous findings: Expression of sarcastic irony =  longer utterance durations (i.e. lower speaking rates)  F0 patterns are lowered and narrowed (in Western Germanic languages like German and English  but raised and widened in Cantonese and Roman languages)  Intensity range is lowered and flattened (i.e. less intensity dynamics), though this is less consistent across studies and languages  (1) But what about “the 4th prosodic dimension“  Voice quality?  So far only anecdotal evidence (e.g., Muecke 1978): compared with sincere/neutral utterances, ironic ones have a softer, breathier voice  can we find experimental evidence for this claim?  = first aim of the present study

Introduction

22.05.2014 3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

 (2) Given our increasing knowledge of the interrelations between seg- ments and prosodies, if/how does irony affect the pronunciation of words? “I do not know” “Guten morgen”

  • ther examples: “Entschuldigung” (I am sorry)  Honest excuse vs.

empty/routine phrase, and “Danke” (thank you)

Introduction

gUtenmoAgen

= hi, let‘s have a short chat

gUmo:

= just greeting, not talking please

eee

= … and I don‘t care = … but I will help you finding out

?aIdoUntnoU

22.05.2014 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

 (2) Given our increasing knowledge of the interrelations between seg- ments and prosodies  Niebuhr & Kohler (2011) and Graupe et al. (2014): Degree of speech reduction is not just determined by competing demands of economy and comprehensibility (cf. H&H theory)   Degree of speech reduction also conveys speaker attitudes towards dialogue partner and/or content of message  Expressing (sarcastic) irony implies conveying: “I distance myself from the semantic content of my utterance”  Degree of speech reduction in ironic utterances higher than in sincere/neutral utterances?  = second aim of the present study

Introduction

22.05.2014 5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • Basis of the production study:
  • 20 Standard German target sentences, designed according to 4 criteria:
  • (1) Syntactically simply constructions of 4-8 frequent words
  •  facilitated a fluent reading with clear and consistent prosody
  • (2) Each target sentence included at last 2 phonetically weak forms
  •  by definition unstressed, prone to high degrees of speech reduction
  • for example: pronouns, aux. verbs, modal particles, articles, prep. etc.
  • (3) Each target sentence could be directed at an interlocutor
  • (4) Each target sentence made positive statements about the

interlocutor or a third party

  •  basis for realizing sarcastic irony by inverting the positive

propositions

Method

22.05.2014 6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • Basis of the production study:
  • 20 Standard German target sentences, designed according to 4 criteria:
  • Das ist aber mal interessant

(That’s so interesting)

  • Das wird bestimmt spannend

(This will surely be exciting)

  • Das läuft ja super

(This works out perferctly)

  • Das ist ja lustig hier heute

(It is indeed funny here today)

  • Er ist besonders wichtig

(He is a very important person)

  • Das riecht richtig lecker

(It smells really delicious)

Method

22.05.2014 7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • Target sentences produced by 10 Standard Northern German speakers
  • 5 males, 5 females
  • 23-29 years old
  • Recordings were conducted in individual sessions in the speakers’ homes
  • Interlocutor was a good friend / fellow student of all 10 speakers
  •  Easier to elicit informal speech and the expressiveness required for

sarcastic irony

  • Speakers were randomly assigned to 2 subgroups
  •  first neutral, then ironic production of the 20 target sentences
  •  first ironic, then neutral production of the 20 target sentences
  • Sentence order was randomized after each round

Method

22.05.2014 8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • Prior to recording:
  • Speakers had time to familiarize themselves with the sentences
  • The concept of sarcastic irony was explained by means of comic strips

 no audio examples

Method

This expresses my personality

You think? www.maescot.de „Das ist ja mal interessant“ (That‘s so interesting), 6x

22.05.2014 9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • All 400 sentences were presented in differently randomized orders
  • …to 4 naïve Standard German listeners
  • Task: judge spontaneously for each sentence whether it was meant

sincerely or ironically

  • Sentences were only kept in the final sample, if they were identified 75%

correctly as being neutral or ironic

Analysis 1: Filtering out unclear cases

71 sentences ironic 136 sentences neutral 71 sentences

22.05.2014 10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • F0 minimum of the sentence, measured in semitones relative to 100/200 Hz for

male/female speakers

  • F0 maximum of the sentence, measured in semitones relative to 100/200 Hz for

male/female speakers

  • F0 range in semitones, i.e. (b) subtracted by (a)
  • average F0 level, calculated in semitones relative to 100/200 Hz for male/female

speakers

  • intensity minimum in dB within a non-silent sound section of the target sentence,
  • intensity maximum in dB,
  • intensity range in dB, i.e. (f) subtracted by (e),
  • average intensity level in dB, disregarding silent (sound) sections of the target

sentence,

  • voice quality in terms of the amplitude difference in dB between the first and the

second harmonic (H1-H2), measured in the midpoints of all vowels of a target sentence and then averaged across these vowels,

  • tempo, represented by the total sentence duration

Analysis 2: Acoustic-prosodic measurements

22.05.2014 11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University
  • Analysis of the degree of speech reduction was done on an auditory

basis

  •  2 trained phoneticians listened to the 2x71 sentences individually
  • …and counted the number of reductions (assimilations, elisions, lenitions)
  • …with reference to the canonical form specified in the DUDEN lexicon,

published by the Institute for the German Language (IDS), Mannheim

Analysis 3: Degree of reduction

22.05.2014 12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Results 1: F0 measurements

Compared with neutral/sincere sentences, ironic sentences had a lower and less melodic pitch contour

  • F0 max strongly lowered (about 4st)
  • F0 min weakly lowered (about 1.5 st)
  •  narrower F0 range
  •  overall lower F0 level

22.05.2014 13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Results 2: Intensity measurements

Compared with neutral/sincere sentences, ironic sentences had a reduced loudness level

  • Int. max lowered (about 7 dB)
  • Int. min lowered to the same extent
  •  lower intensity level
  •  constant intensity range

22.05.2014 14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Results 3: Duration and voice-quality (VQ) measurements

Compared with neutral/sincere sentences, ironic utterances showed overall no systematic voice quality (VQ) differences, but had more variable voice qualities

  •  Levene test: clearly heterogeneous

variances (p<0.001) for neutral vs. ironic Compared with neutral/sincere sentences, ironic sentences had longer overall durations

  • = lower speaking rate (about 30%), also

when measured in syll/sec

  • 7.1 (neutral)  5.5 (ironic) syll/sec

22.05.2014 15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Results 4: Degree of speech reduction

  • Compared with neutral/sincere sentences, ironic sentences showed a

significantly higher degree of reduction (strong effect, but not consistent)

22.05.2014 16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Discussion & Conclusions

 The present findings:  (1) replicated previous findings on the differences between utterances with and without sarcastic irony   Irony = slower, lower and flatter intonation, overall lower intensity level  (2) provide initial evidence that voice quality is involved in conveying sarcastic irony, though not in a straightforward way  (3) support the assumption that utterances with sarcastic irony  show a higher degree of speech reduction  or – similarly – a comparable degree of speech reduction at a lower speaking rate (for which less reduction would be expected)

22.05.2014 17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Discussion & Conclusions

 Why the variation in prosodic parameters?  For exmaple, voice quality in the present study   Probably because  'sarcastic irony' itself is not a homogeneous subtype of irony. => Are there subtypes of 'sarcastic irony‘‚  and/or the expression of sarcastic irony is overlaid by other communicative functions or emotions

22.05.2014 18

Target utterances in which irony is used to point to lack of future changes/alternatives = breathy voice „Das ist ein schönes Leben“ (This is a beautiful life) Target utterances in which irony is used to point to future changes/ alternatives = tense voice „Das ist eine tolle Jacke“ (This is a great jacket)

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Oliver Niebuhr Analysis of Spoken Language,

  • Dept. of General Linguistics, Kiel University

Discussion & Conclusions

 Future plans/challenges  (1) The new findings on voice quality and speech reduction should be further substantiated and studied in a cross-linguistic perspective  (2) There should be a separate line of research on the substructures of the 'irony' concept, which can complement our growing phonetic understanding of irony

Thank you for your attention

22.05.2014 19