↓ Skip to main content

Phonetic and phonological imitation of intonation in two varieties of Italian

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Phonetic and phonological imitation of intonation in two varieties of Italian
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01226
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariapaola D’Imperio, Rossana Cavone, Caterina Petrone

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test whether both phonetic and phonological representations of intonation can be rapidly modified when imitating utterances belonging to a different regional variety of the same language. Our main hypothesis was that tonal alignment, just as other phonetic features of speech, would be rapidly modified by Italian speakers when imitating pitch accents of a different (Southern) variety of Italian. In particular, we tested whether Bari Italian (BI) speakers would produce later peaks for their native rising L + H(*) (question pitch accent) in the process of imitating Neapolitan Italian (NI) rising L(*) + H accents. Also, we tested whether BI speakers are able to modify other phonetic properties (pitch level) as well as phonological characteristics (changes in tonal composition) of the same contour. In a follow-up study, we tested if the reverse was also true, i.e., whether NI speakers would produce earlier peaks within the L(*) + H accent in the process of imitating the L + H(*) of BI questions, despite the presence of a contrast between two rising accents in this variety. Our results show that phonetic detail of tonal alignment can be successfully modified by both BI and NI speakers when imitating a model speaker of the other variety. The hypothesis of a selective imitation process preventing alignment modifications in NI was hence not supported. Moreover the effect was significantly stronger for low frequency words. Participants were also able to imitate other phonetic cues, in that they modified global utterance pitch level. Concerning phonological convergence, speakers modified the tonal specification of the edge tones in order to resemble that of the other variety by either suppressing or increasing the presence of a final H%. Hence, our data show that intonation imitation leads to fast modification of both phonetic and phonological intonation representations including detail of tonal alignment and pitch scaling.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 142 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 4%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 3%
Student > Master 5 3%
Student > Postgraduate 2 1%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 120 83%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 20 14%
Psychology 2 1%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 1%
Social Sciences 1 <1%
Unknown 120 83%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,574,276
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,552
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,876
of 263,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#278
of 378 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 378 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.