Acquiring Complex Focus-Marking: Finnish 4- to 5-Year-Olds Use Prosody and Word Order in Interaction

Using a language game to elicit short sentences in various information structural conditions, we found that Finnish 4- to 5-year-olds already exhibit a characteristic interaction between prosody and word order in marking information structure. Providing insights into the acquisition of this complex system of interactions, the production data showed interesting parallels to adult speakers of Finnish on the one hand and to children acquiring other languages on the other hand. Analyzing a total of 571 sentences produced by 16 children, we found that children rarely adjusted input word order, but did systematically avoid marked OVS order in contrastive object focus condition. Focus condition also significantly affected four prosodic parameters, f0, duration, pauses and voice quality. Differing slightly from effects displayed in adult Finnish speech, the children produced larger f0 ranges for words in contrastive focus and smaller ones for unfocused words, varied only the duration of object constituents to be longer in focus and shorter in unfocused condition, inserted more pauses before and after focused constituents and systematically modified their use of non-modal voice quality only in utterances with narrow focus. Crucially, these effects were modulated by word order. In contrast to comparable data from children acquiring Germanic languages, the present findings reflect the more central role of word order and of interactions between word order and prosody in marking information structure in Finnish. Thus, the study highlights the role of the target language in determining linguistic development.

[1]  Mats Rooth Association with focus , 1985 .

[2]  P. Hornby,et al.  Use of contrastive stress by preschool children. , 1970, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[4]  David I. Beaver,et al.  When Semantics Meets Phonetics: Acoustical Studies of Second-Occurrence Focus , 2007 .

[5]  Maria Vilkuna,et al.  Free word order in Finnish : its syntax and discourse functions , 1991 .

[6]  Laura E. de Ruiter How German children use intonation to signal information status in narrative discourse. , 2014 .

[7]  L. Wieman Stress patterns of early child language , 1976, Journal of Child Language.

[8]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  Focus in production: tonal shape, intensity and word order. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Elsi Kaiser,et al.  The discourse functions and syntax of OSV word order in Finnish , 2000 .

[10]  Kari Suomi,et al.  On durational correlates of word stress in Finnish , 2004, J. Phonetics.

[11]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Basic notions of information structure , 2008 .

[12]  Riitta Välimaa‐Blum,et al.  Finnish existential clauses – their syntax, pragmatics and intonation , 1988 .

[13]  Riitta Välimaa-Blum A Pitch Accent Analysis of Intonation in Finnish , 1988 .

[14]  Mietta Lennes,et al.  FINNISH SOUND STRUCTURE. PHONETICS, PHONOLOGY, PHONOTACTICS AND PROSODY , 2010 .

[15]  Kari Suomi,et al.  On the tonal and temporal domains of accent in Finnish , 2007, J. Phonetics.

[16]  Paavo Alku,et al.  Laryngeal voice quality in the expression of focus , 2010, INTERSPEECH.

[17]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

[18]  Ailbhe Ní Chasaide,et al.  Voice Source Dynamics in Intonation , 2011, ICPhS.

[19]  Aoju Chen,et al.  Intonation of early two-word utterances in Dutch , 2007 .

[20]  Fred Karlsson Finnish: An Essential Grammar , 1999 .

[21]  Nancy Hedberg,et al.  The Prosody of Topic and Focus in Spontaneous English Dialogue , 2008 .

[22]  Aoju Chen Tuning information packaging: intonational realization of topic and focus in child Dutch. , 2011, Journal of child language.

[23]  C. Féry,et al.  The phonology of Second Occurrence Focus1 , 2009, Journal of Linguistics.

[24]  Aoju Chen The phonetics of sentence-initial topic and focus in adult and child Dutch , 2008 .

[25]  S. C. Dik,et al.  On the typology of Focus phenomena , 1981 .

[26]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  Sentential devices for conveying givenness and newness: A cross-cultural developmental study , 1978 .

[27]  M. Redford A comparative analysis of pausing in child and adult storytelling , 2012, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[28]  Elsi Kaiser,et al.  Negation and the left periphery in Finnish , 2006 .

[29]  P. Prieto The Intonational Phonology of Catalan , 2008 .

[30]  Maria Vilkuna,et al.  On Rheme and Kontrast , 1998 .

[31]  Aoju Chen INTONATIONAL REALISATION OF TOPIC AND FOCUS BY DUTCH-ACQUIRING 4- TO 5-YEAR-OLDS , 2007 .

[32]  L. Wagner,et al.  Interpretation of contrastive pitch accent in six- to eleven-year-old English-speaking children (and adults)* , 2012, Journal of Child Language.

[33]  Jeanette K. Gundel,et al.  Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse , 1993 .

[34]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  Information structure and sentence form , 1994 .

[35]  Kristiina Jokinen 22 A Grammar for Finnish Discourse Patterns , 2005 .

[36]  Daniel Büring,et al.  Topic and focus : cross-linguistic perspectives on meaning and intonation , 2007 .

[37]  E. Selkirk,et al.  Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from phonetic prominence in English , 2012 .

[38]  Kiwako Ito,et al.  Anticipatory effects of intonation: Eye movements during instructed visual search. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[39]  Aoju Chen,et al.  Quiet is the New Loud: Pausing and Focus in Child and Adult Dutch , 2015, Language and speech.

[40]  V. Marchman,et al.  Blue car, red car: Developing efficiency in online interpretation of adjective–noun phrases , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  Austin F. Frank,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2010 .

[42]  Trond Trosterud,et al.  The Structure of INFL and the Finite Clause in Finnish , 1993 .

[43]  Bettina Braun,et al.  Phonetics and Phonology of Thematic Contrast in German , 2006, Language and speech.

[44]  J. Goldsmith,et al.  The Structure of Intonational Meaning: Evidence from English , 1982 .

[45]  Ryan Bennett Prosodic typology II : the phonology of intonation and phrasing , 2015 .

[46]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Young Children’s Intonational Marking of New, Given and Contrastive Referents , 2015 .

[47]  Kari Suomi,et al.  Durational and tonal correlates of accent in Finnish , 2003, J. Phonetics.

[48]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[49]  C. Dimroth,et al.  Word order and information status in child language , 2008, Cognition.

[50]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[51]  Jeanette K. Gundel,et al.  Cognitive Status and the form of Referring Expressions in Discourse , 1993, The Oxford Handbook of Reference.

[52]  Mats Rooth A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[53]  Aoju Chen Is there really an asymmetry in the acquisition of the focus-to-accentuation mapping? , 2010 .

[54]  T. Reinhart Pragmatics and Linguistics: an analysis of Sentence Topics , 1981, Philosophica.

[55]  U. Nikanne,et al.  Expletives, Subjects, and Topics in Finnish , 2002 .

[56]  Antti Iivonen Äännekeston riippuvuus sanan pituudesta irrallaan äännetyissä sanoissa , 1974 .

[57]  Kari Suomi,et al.  Utterance-final lengthening and quantity in Northern Finnish , 2009, J. Phonetics.

[58]  Scott Myers,et al.  The Origin of Vowel Length Neutralization in Final Position: Evidence from Finnish Speakers , 2007 .

[59]  Carlos Gussenhoven,et al.  Types of focus in English , 2008 .

[60]  Bill Wells,et al.  Intonation development from five to thirteen , 2004, Journal of Child Language.

[61]  Viljo Kohonen,et al.  Reports on Text Linguistics: Approaches to Word Order , 1976 .

[62]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat: doing phonetics by computer , 2003 .

[63]  Valéria Molnár,et al.  Discourse Configurationality in Finnish and Hungarian. , 2003 .

[64]  Martti Vainio,et al.  Tonal features, intensity, and word order in the perception of prominence , 2006, J. Phonetics.

[65]  A. D. Dominicis,et al.  Intonation Systems: A Survey of Twenty Languages , 1999 .

[66]  Caroline Féry,et al.  The Role of Syntactic Flexibility and Prosody in Marking Given / New Distinctions in Finnish , 2014 .

[67]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[68]  Roger Schwarzschild,et al.  GIVENNESS, AVOIDF AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE PLACEMENT OF ACCENT* , 1999 .

[69]  Saveria Colonna,et al.  Information structure cues for 4-year-olds and adults: tracking eye movements to visually presented anaphoric referents , 2014 .

[70]  Jason Baldridge,et al.  DotCCG and VisCCG: Wiki and Programming Paradigms for Improved Grammar Engineering with OpenCCG , 2007 .

[71]  Anja Arnhold,et al.  Complex prosodic focus marking in Finnish: Expanding the data landscape , 2016, J. Phonetics.

[72]  Gorka Elordieta,et al.  Constraints on Intonational Prominence of Focalized Constituents , 2008 .

[73]  J. Nevis Finnish particle clitics and general clitic theory , 1985 .

[74]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  The manifestation of linguistic information in prosodic features of Finnish , 2002 .

[75]  Juhani Järvikivi,et al.  Intonational marking of focus in different word orders in German children , 2011 .

[77]  Ulrike Gut,et al.  The relationship between prosodic and syntactic organization in early multiword speech , 2005, Journal of Child Language.