Perceptual and acoustic analysis of prosody in Mandarin Chinese refusals

IF 1.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Journal of Pragmatics Pub Date : 2024-09-20 DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2024.09.004
{"title":"Perceptual and acoustic analysis of prosody in Mandarin Chinese refusals","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2024.09.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In Mandarin Chinese, ritual refusals are often employed to enhance politeness or to test the sincerity of the invitation or offer. This study examines whether native listeners can accurately judge the sincerity of refusals when hearing complete sentences or keywords, and whether their judgement is associated with specific prosodic cues. Twelve native Mandarin speakers each produced 10 sincere and 10 ritual refusal sentences containing the keyword <em>buyong</em> (‘you don't need to’). These 240 complete sentences and 240 keywords extracted from the complete sentences were used in an Aural Sincerity Rating Task. Seventy-two native listeners listened to these stimuli and judged their sincerity (forced choice). Results showed that listeners could judge the sincerity of refusals when listening to complete sentences as well as keywords, the latter of which did not contain any contextual information. This suggests that they relied on prosodic cues to make their judgement. Acoustic Analyses conducted on the accurately-perceived stimuli revealed that ritual refusals tended to have a higher mean pitch, a larger pitch range, and a slower speech rate than sincere refusals. This study demonstrates the critical role of prosody in conveying nuanced speaker intention in Mandarin.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216624001723","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Mandarin Chinese, ritual refusals are often employed to enhance politeness or to test the sincerity of the invitation or offer. This study examines whether native listeners can accurately judge the sincerity of refusals when hearing complete sentences or keywords, and whether their judgement is associated with specific prosodic cues. Twelve native Mandarin speakers each produced 10 sincere and 10 ritual refusal sentences containing the keyword buyong (‘you don't need to’). These 240 complete sentences and 240 keywords extracted from the complete sentences were used in an Aural Sincerity Rating Task. Seventy-two native listeners listened to these stimuli and judged their sincerity (forced choice). Results showed that listeners could judge the sincerity of refusals when listening to complete sentences as well as keywords, the latter of which did not contain any contextual information. This suggests that they relied on prosodic cues to make their judgement. Acoustic Analyses conducted on the accurately-perceived stimuli revealed that ritual refusals tended to have a higher mean pitch, a larger pitch range, and a slower speech rate than sincere refusals. This study demonstrates the critical role of prosody in conveying nuanced speaker intention in Mandarin.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对普通话拒绝语中的拟声词进行感知和声学分析
在汉语普通话中,礼节性的拒绝经常被用来增强礼貌或测试邀请或提议的诚意。本研究探讨了母语听者在听到完整句子或关键词时能否准确判断拒绝的诚意,以及他们的判断是否与特定的发音线索有关。12 位以普通话为母语的人各说了 10 个包含关键词 buyong("你不需要")的真诚拒绝句和 10 个礼节性拒绝句。这 240 个完整句子和从完整句子中提取的 240 个关键词被用于 "听觉真诚度评级任务"。72 名本地听者聆听了这些刺激,并对其真诚度进行了判断(强制选择)。结果显示,听者在聆听完整句子和关键词(后者不包含任何上下文信息)时,都能判断出拒绝的诚意。这表明他们是依靠前音线索做出判断的。对准确感知到的刺激进行声学分析后发现,与真诚的拒绝相比,礼仪性拒绝的平均音调更高、音域更大、语速更慢。这项研究表明,在普通话中,拟声词在传达说话人的细微意图方面起着至关重要的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
18.80%
发文量
219
期刊介绍: Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.
期刊最新文献
Temporality and causality in asymmetric conjunction “By then you'd say ‘why hadn't I hung on a little bit longer?’”: Ventriloquizing as indirectness in Chinese medical interaction “I think Gray is just against you there”: Intertextuality and personification in legal discourse Perceptual and acoustic analysis of prosody in Mandarin Chinese refusals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1