Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T01:25:51.733Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stylized Intonation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

D. Robert Ladd Jr.
D. Robert Ladd Jr.*
Affiliation:
Cornell University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The English intonation often referred to as a calling contour—a stepping-down sequence of two level tones—is not inherently associated with calling, but rather conveys the implication that an utterance is in some way stereotyped or stylized. Vivid and quite precise nuances in specific usages can be accounted for by the abstract meaning ‘stylized’. This meaning is not restricted to the stepping-down contour, but is a more general phenomenon: at least three contours ending in level pitch are ‘stylized’ modifications of ‘plain’ contours ending in rising or falling pitch. The relationship of stylized contours to plain contours provides some evidence for preferring British-style ‘nuclear tones’ to whole-sentence ‘tunes’ as units of analysis. More importantly, it clearly demonstrates the inadequacy of any approach to English intonation which treats contours as sequences of significant pitch levels.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , September 1978 , pp. 517 - 540
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abe, Isamu. 1962. Call contours. Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 519–23. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1951. Intonation: levels vs. configurations. Word 7.199–210. [Reprinted in Bolinger 1965:3–16.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1958. A theory of pitch accent in English. Word 14.109–49. [Reprinted in Bolinger 1965:17–55.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1961. Generality, gradience, and the all-or-none. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1965. Forms of English: accent, morpheme, order. Ed. by I. Abe & T. Kanekiyo. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chao, Y. R. 1930. A system of tone letters. Le Maître Phonétique 45.24–7.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 1969a. A forgotten English tone: An alternative analysis. Le Maître Phonétique 84.34–7.Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 1969b. Prosodic systems and intonation in English. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, Anthony. 1969. A forgotten English tone. Le Maître Phonétique 84.13–14.Google Scholar
Fox, Anthony. 1970. The forgotten tone: a reply. Le Maître Phonétique 85.29–31.Google Scholar
Gibbon, Dafydd. 1976. Perspectives of intonation analysis. (Forum Linguisticum, 9.) Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1976. Autosegmental phonology. MIT dissertation, distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Greenberg, S. Robert. 1969. An experimental study of certain intonation contrasts in American English. (UCLA working papers in phonetics, 13.) Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1967. Intonation and grammar in British English. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. F. 1955. A manual of phonology. (Indiana University publications in anthropology and linguistics, 11.) Baltimore.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howie, J. M. 1976. Acoustical studies of Mandarin vowels and tones. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, Roger. 1958. The groundwork of English intonation. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert Jr. 1978. The structure of intonational meaning. Cornell dissertation.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1967. Linguistic phonetics. (UCLA working papers in phonetics, 6.) Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Leben, William. 1976. The tones in English intonation. Linguistic Analysis 2.69–107.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. W. 1970. The tonal system of remote speech. Le Maître Phonétique 85.31–6.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark. 1975 The intonational system of English. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark, and Sag, Ivan. 1974. Prosodic form and discourse function. Papers from the 10th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 416–27.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J. D., and Arnold, G. F. 1961. Intonation of colloquial English: a practical handbook. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Palmer, Harold. 1924. English intonation, with systematic exercises. Cambridge: Heffer.Google Scholar
Pike, Kenneth. 1945. The intonation of American English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan, and Liberman, Mark. 1975. The intonational disambiguation of indirect speech acts. Papers from the 11th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, 487–97.Google Scholar
Schubiger, Maria. 1958. English intonation: its form and function. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Sledd, James. 1955. Review of Trager and Smith 1951. Lg. 31.312–45.Google Scholar
Trager, George L., and Smith, Henry Lee. 1951. An outline of English structure. Norman, Oklahoma. [Reprinted 1957, slightly revised, Washington: ACLS.]Google Scholar
Vanderslice, Ralph, and Ladefoged, Peter. 1972. Binary suprasegmental features and transformational word-accentuation rules. Lg. 48.819–38.Google Scholar
Walton, A. Ronald. 1976. Syllable and tone in Chinese. Cornell dissertation.Google Scholar
Wang, William S-Y. 1967. The phonological features of tone. IJAL 33.93–105.Google Scholar
Wells, Rulon S. 1945. The pitch phonemes of English. Lg. 21.27–39.Google Scholar
Woo, Nancy. 1969. Prosody and phonology. MIT dissertation, formerly distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar