Post-focus compression in Brahvi and Balochi
-
Nasir Abbas Syed
,
Anqi Xu
Abstract
Previous research has shown that post-focus compression (PFC) — the reduction of pitch range and intensity after a focused word in an utterance, is a robust means of marking focus, but it is present only in some languages. The presence of PFC appears to follow language family lines. The present study is a further exploration of the distribution of PFC by investigating Brahvi, a Dravidian language, and Balochi, an Indo-Iranian language. Balochi is predicted to show PFC given its presence in other Iranian languages. Dravidian languages have not been studied for prosodic focus before and they are not related to any languages with PFC. We recorded twenty native speakers from each language producing declarative sentences in different focus conditions. Acoustic analyses showed that, in both languages, post-focus f 0 and other correlates were significantly reduced relative to baseline neutral-focus sentences, but post-focus lowering of f 0, and intensity was greater in magnitude in Balochi than in Brahvi. The Balochi results confirm our prediction, while the Brahvi results offer the first evidence of PFC in a Dravidian language. The finding of PFC in a Dravidian language is relevant to a postulated origin of PFC, which is related to the controversial Nostratic Macrofamily hypothesis.
Funding source: Higher Education Commission of Pakistan https://hec.gov.pk/english/services/faculty/trgp/Pages/default.aspx
Award Identifier / Grant number: Thematic Research Grant No. 1500024064/11062
-
Author contributions: Nasir Abbas Syed and Professor Yi Xu conceived and designed the study, Nasir Abbas Syed and Abdul Waheed Shah conducted the experiments; Anqi Xu performed the statistical analysis. All participated in the writing of the manuscript.
-
Research funding: This research project was completed with funding provided by Higher Education Commission of Pakistan under the head of Thematic Research Grants Program (Thematic Research Grant No. 1500024064/11062).
-
Statement of ethics: This study observed ethical requirements related to human subjects. All participants of this study were adults (age range: 18–31 years, mean: 23.75 years). Therefore, permission for recording was obtained from participants themselves instead of their parents. First, we explained the whole scheme of study without pointing the specific objectives to the participants and then requested them to participate in the study. Only those students who were willing to participate at their own will were selected for participation. Written consent for recording their voices was obtained from those participants who were willing to participate in the experiment. We assured the participants that these recordings will only be heard by the researchers and transcribed for research purpose. They were also informed that only statistical information obtained from acoustic analysis of their productions in summarized form (mean values) will be quoted in the paper. The anonymity of the participants was also assured to them. Later, they signed a consent form to give us permission to record their productions. Each participant was called for recording at the time of his convenience. They were explicitly told that they were at liberty to leave the experiment at any stage. They were also compensated for their time in terms of money. Since no risk or danger was involved in this study, therefore, the paper was exempt from ethical committee approval. In consultation with the Department of English language and linguistics LUAWMS the team of researchers decided not to approach any Committee for ethical approval of the project.
-
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
Abolhasanizadeh, Vahideh, Mahmood Bijankhan & Carlos Gussenhoven. 2012. The Persian pitch accent and its retention after the focus. Lingua 122. 1380–1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.06.002.Search in Google Scholar
Alzaidi, Muhammad Swaileh, Yi Xu & Anqi Xu. 2019. Prosodic encoding of focus in Hijazi Arabic. Speech Communication 106. 127–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2018.12.006.Search in Google Scholar
Andronov, Michail S. 1980. The Brahvi language. Msocow: Nauka Publishing House Central.Search in Google Scholar
Asher, Ronald. E. 1982. Tamil (Lingua Descriptive Studies). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Search in Google Scholar
Azid, Muhammad Shafiq & Yi Xu. 2020. Prosodic focus in Malay without post-focus compression. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities 28. 91–108.Search in Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, Steven Walker, Rune Haubo Bojesen Christensen, Henrik Singmann, Bin Dai, Fabian Scheipl & Gabor, Grothendieck. (2015). Package ‘lme4’. Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version, 1(6).Search in Google Scholar
Bellwood, Peter. 2001. Early agriculturalist population diasporas? Farming, languages, and genes. Annual Review of Anthropology 30. 181–207. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.181.Search in Google Scholar
Birahimani, Ali H. 2021. Reviewing the history and development of aspiration in Eastern Balochi. Journal of Historical Linguistics 11(3). 457–498. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.19010.bir.Search in Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul. 2001. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International 5(9/10). 341–345.Search in Google Scholar
Botinis, Antonis, Marios Fourakis & Barbara Gawronska. 1999. Focus identification in English, Greek and Swedish. Paper presented at the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, San Francisco, 1–7 August.Search in Google Scholar
Bray, Denys. 1977. The Brahvi language: Introduction and grammar part 1. Quetta: Brahvi Academy.Search in Google Scholar
Chahal, Dana. 2003. Phonetic cues to prominence in Lebanese Arabic. Paper presented at the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, 3–9 August.Search in Google Scholar
Chaubey, Gyaneshwer, Mait Metspalu, Richard Villems & Toomas Kivisild. 2007. Reply to winters. BioEssays 29. 499. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.20574.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Lijing, Lin Wang & Yufang Yang. 2014. Distinguish between focus and newness: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics 31. 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2014.06.002.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Szu-Wei, Bei Wang & Yi Xu. 2009. Closely related languages, different ways of realizing focus. Paper presented at the Tenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association, Brighton, UK, 6–10 September.10.21437/Interspeech.2009-298Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Ying. 2015. Post-focus compression in English by Mandarin learners. Paper presented at the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow, UK, 10–14 August.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Ying, Yi Xu & Susan Guion-Anderson. 2014. Prosodic realization of focus in bilingual production of Southern Min and Mandarin. Phonetica 71. 249–270. https://doi.org/10.1159/000371891.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Lijing & Yang Yufang. 2015. Emphasizing the only character: Emphasis, attention and contrast. Cognition 136. 222–227.10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.015Search in Google Scholar
Clopper, Cynthia G. & Judith Tonhauser. 2013. The prosody of focus in Paraguayan guaraní. International Journal of American Linguistics 79(2). 219–251. https://doi.org/10.1086/669629.Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, William E., Stephen J. Eady & Pamela R. Mueller. 1985. Acoustical aspects of contrastive stress in question-answer contexts. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 77. 2142–2156. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.392372.Search in Google Scholar
Dashti, Naseer. 2012. The Baloch and Balochistan: A historical account from the beginning to the fall of the Baloch State. Bloomington: Trafford Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Diamond, Jared & Peter Bellwood. 2003. Farmers and their languages: The first expansions. Science 300. 597–603. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1078208.Search in Google Scholar
Dohen, Marion & Hélène Lœvenbruck. 2004. Pre-focal rephrasing, focal enhancement and postfocal deaccentuation in French. Paper presented at the Eighth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Jeju, Korea, 4–8 October.10.21437/Interspeech.2004-296Search in Google Scholar
Eady, Stephen J. & William E. Cooper. 1986. Speech intonation and focus location in matched statements and questions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 80. 402–416. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.394091.Search in Google Scholar
Eady, Stephen J., William E. Cooper, Gayle V. Klouda, Pamela R. Mueller & Dan W. Lotts. 1986. Acoustic characteristics of sentential focus: Narrow versus broad and single versus dual focus environments. Language and Speech 29. 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098602900304.Search in Google Scholar
Elfenbein, Josef. 1997a. Balochi phonology. In Alan S. Kaye & Peter T. Daniels (eds.), Phonologies of Asia and Africa, vol. 1, 761–777. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. https://www.eisenbrauns.org/books/titles/978-1-57506-019-4.html.Search in Google Scholar
Elfenbein, Josef. 1997b. Brahui phonology. In Alan S. Kaye & Peter T. Daniels (eds.), Phonologies of Asia and Africa, vol. 1, 797–811. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. https://www.eisenbrauns.org/books/titles/978-1-57506-019-4.html.Search in Google Scholar
Elfenbein, Josef. 2015. Brahui. In The Dravidian languages, pp. 406–432. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315722580-18Search in Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline & Frank Kügler. 2008. Pitch accent scaling on given, new and focused constituents in German. Journal of Phonetics 36. 680–703.10.1016/j.wocn.2008.05.001Search in Google Scholar
François, Alexandre. 2015. Trees, waves and linkages: Models of language diversification. The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 161–189. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Fuller, Dorian Q. 2003. An agricultural perspective on Dravidian historical linguistics: Archaeological crop packages, livestock and Dravidian crop vocabulary. In Peter Bellwood & Colin Renfrew (eds.), Assessing the languaging/farming dispersal hypothesis, 191–213. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Search in Google Scholar
Genzel, Susanne, Agata Renans & Frank Kügler. 2018. Focus and its prosody in Akan and Ga. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2018, Poznań, 13–16 June.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2018-147Search in Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew. 2008. The intonational realization of contrastive focus in Chickasaw. Topic and focus, 69–82. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-4796-1_4Search in Google Scholar
Gray, Russell. 2005. Pushing the time barrier in the quest for language roots. Science 309. 2007–2008. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1119276.Search in Google Scholar
Hellmuth, Sam. 2006. Focus-related pitch range manipulation (and peak alignment effects) in Egyptian Arabic. Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2006, Dresden, Germany, 2–5 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2006-100Search in Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus. P. 2018. Some preliminary observations on prosody and information structure in Austronesian languages of Indonesia and East Timor. Studies in Diversity Linguistics(21).Search in Google Scholar
Ipek, Canan. 2011. Phonetic realization of focus with no on-focus pitch range expansion in Turkish. Paper presented at the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, 17–21 August.Search in Google Scholar
Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2011. Japanese focus prosody revisited: Freeing focus from prosodic phrasing. Lingua 121. 1870–1889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.06.008.Search in Google Scholar
Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2015. Syntax-phonology interface. In Haruo Kubozono (ed.), Handbook of Japanese phonetics and phonology, 569–618. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9781614511984.569Search in Google Scholar
Jahani, Carina & Agnes Korn. 2009. Balochi. In Gernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian languages, 634–692. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Kokaislova, Pavla. 2012. Ethnic identity of the Baloch people. Central Asian and the Caucasus Journal of Social and Political Studies 13(3). 45–55.Search in Google Scholar
Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 2003. The Dravidian languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486876Search in Google Scholar
Kügler, Frank & Stavros, Skopeteas. 2007. On the universality of prosodic reflexes of contrast: The case of Yucatec Maya. Paper presented at the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Saarbrücken, 6–10 August.Search in Google Scholar
Lee, Albert & Yi Xu. 2012. Revisiting focus prosody in Japanese. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2012, Shanghai, 22–25 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2012-70Search in Google Scholar
Lee, Albert & Yi Xu. 2018. Conditional realisation of post-focus compression in Japanese. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2018, Poznań, 13–16 June.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2018-44Search in Google Scholar
Lee, Yong-Cheol & Yi Xu. 2010. Phonetic realization of contrastive focus in Korean. Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2010, Chicago, 10–14 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2010-81Search in Google Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe & Cristina Guardiano. 2009. Evidence for syntax as a signal of historical relatedness. Lingua 119. 1679–1706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.012.Search in Google Scholar
Maskikit-Essed, Raechel & Carlos Gussenhoven. 2016. No stress, no pitch accent, no prosodic focus: The case of Ambonese Malay. Phonology 33. 353–389. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675716000154.Search in Google Scholar
McAlpin, David W. 1980. Is Brahui really Dravidian? Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 6. 66–72.10.3765/bls.v6i0.2113Search in Google Scholar
McAlpin, David W. 1981. Proto-Elamo-Dravidian: The evidence and its implications. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 71(3). 1–155. https://doi.org/10.2307/1006352.Search in Google Scholar
McDonough, Joyce. 2002. The prosody of interrogative and focus constructions in Navajo. In Andrew Carnie & Heidi Harley (eds.), Formal approaches to functional phenomena, 191–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.62.15mcdSearch in Google Scholar
Meyer, Roland & Ina Mlinek. 2006. How prosody signals force and focus – a study of pitch accents in Russian yes-no questions. Journal of Pragmatics 38(10). 1615–1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.05.011.Search in Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1996. The comparative method as heuristic. In Mark Durie & Malcolm Ross (eds.), The comparative method revised, 39–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Palanichamy, Malliya Gounder, Bikash Mitra, Cai-Ling Zhang, Monojit Debnath, Gui-Mei Li, Hua-Wei Wang, Suraksha Agrawal, Tapas Kumar Chaudary & Ya-Ping Zhang. 2015. West eurasian mtDNA lineages in India: An insight into the spread of the Dravidian language and the origins of the caste system. Human Genetics 134. 637–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-015-1547-4.Search in Google Scholar
Patil, Umesh, Gerrit Kentner, Anja Gollrad, Frank Kügler, Caroline Féry & Shravan Vasishth. 2008. Focus, word order and intonation in Hindi. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 1. 55–72.Search in Google Scholar
Pedersen, Holger. 1931. The discovery of language: Linguistic science in the nineteenth century. English translation by John Webster Spargo. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674184381Search in Google Scholar
Quintana-Murci, Lluís, Csilla Krausz, Tatiana Zerjal, Syed-Hamid Sayar, Michael F.Hammer, Syed-Qasim Mehdi, Qasim Ayub, Raheel Qamar, Aisha Mohyuddin, Uppala Radhakrishna, Mark A. Jobling, Chris Tyler-Smith & Ken McElreavey. 2001. Y-chromosome lineages trace diffusion of people and languages in Southwestern Asia. The American Journal of Human Genetics 68. 537–542.10.1086/318200Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2019. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Search in Google Scholar
Rahmani, Hamed, Toni Rietveld & Carlos Gussenhoven. 2015. Stress deafness reveals absence of lexical marking of stress or tone in the adult grammar. PLoS One 10(12). e0143968. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143968.Search in Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin. 1988. Archaeology and language. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Rialland, Annie & Stéphane Robert. 2001. The intonational system of Wolof. Linguistics 39. 893–939. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.038.Search in Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald A. 1992. On calculating the factor of chance in language comparison. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 82. 1–110. https://doi.org/10.2307/1006563.Search in Google Scholar
Rognoni, Luca, Judith Bishop, & Miriam Corris. 2017. Pashto intonation patterns. Paper presented at the Interspeech 2017, Stockholm, Sweden, 20–24 August.10.21437/Interspeech.2017-1353Search in Google Scholar
Rump, Hans H. & Rene Collier. 1996. Focus conditions and the prominence of pitch-accented syllables. Language and Speech 39. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099603900101.Search in Google Scholar
Shouse, Ben. 2001. Spreading the word, scattering the seeds. Science 294. 988–989. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.294.5544.988.Search in Google Scholar
Southworth, Franklin, C. & David, W. McAlpin. 2014. South Asia: Dravidian linguistic history. The Global Prehistory of Human Migration, 235–244. Chicester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell.10.1002/9781444351071.wbeghm830Search in Google Scholar
Sugahara, Mariko. 2002. Conditions on post-FOCUS dephrasing in Tokyo Japanese. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Speech Prosody, Aix-en-Provence, France, 11–13 April.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2002-149Search in Google Scholar
Swerts, Marc & Sabine Zerbian. 2010. Prosodic transfer in Black South African English. Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2010, Chicago, 10–14 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2010-7Search in Google Scholar
Taheri-Ardali, Mortaza & Yi Xu. 2012. Phonetic realization of prosodic focus in Persian. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2012, Shanghai, 22–25 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2012-83Search in Google Scholar
Tripathy, Vikal, NA Nirmala & Bishav Mohan Reddy. 2008. Trends in molecular anthropological studies in India. International Journal of Human Genetics 8. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09723757.2008.11886015.Search in Google Scholar
Winters, Clyde A. 2007. Did the Dravidian speakers originate in Africa? BioEssays 27. 497–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.20565.Search in Google Scholar
Winters, Clyde. 2008. Origin and spread of Dravidian speakers. International Journal of Human Genetics 8. 325–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/09723757.2008.11886047.Search in Google Scholar
Winters, Clyde. 2012. Origin of the Niger-Congo speakers. Web med Central GENETICS 1–18 3(3). WMC003149. https://doi.org/10.9754/journal.wmc.2012.003149.Search in Google Scholar
Wu, Wing Li & Yi Xu. 2010. Prosodic focus in Hong Kong Cantonese without post-focus compression. Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2010, Chicago, 10–14 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2010-85Search in Google Scholar
Wu, Wing Li & Lisa Chung. 2011. Post-focus compression in English-Cantonese bilingual speakers. Paper presented at the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, 17–21 August.Search in Google Scholar
Xu, Yi. 1999. Effects of tone and focus on the formation and alignment of f0 contours. Journal of Phonetics 27. 55–105. https://doi.org/10.1006/jpho.1999.0086.Search in Google Scholar
Xu, Yi. 2011. Post-focus compression: Cross-linguistic distribution and historical origin. Paper presented at the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, 17–21 August.Search in Google Scholar
Xu, Yi. 2013. ProsodyPro — A tool for large-scale systematic prosody analysis, tools and resources for the analysis of speech prosody (TRASP 2013), 7–10. Aix-en-Provence, France: Laboratoire Parole et Langage.Search in Google Scholar
Xu, Yi, Ching X. Xu & Xuejing Sun. 2004. On the temporal domain of focus. Paper presented at the International Conference on Speech Prosody 2004, Nara, Japan, 23–26 March.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2004-19Search in Google Scholar
Xu, Yi & Ching X. Xu. 2005. Phonetic realization of focus in English declarative intonation. Journal of Phonetics 33. 159–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2004.11.001.Search in Google Scholar
Zerbian, Sabine, Susanne Genzel & Frank Kügler. 2010. Experimental work on prosodically-marked information structure in selected African languages (Afroasiatic and Niger-Congo). Paper presented at the Speech Prosody 2010, Chicago, 10–14 May.10.21437/SpeechProsody.2010-86Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
