The relations between phonotactics and speech rhythm in Czech

The main objective of this study is to explore the relationships between the phonotactic structure of the Czech stress-group and rhythm of speech. Three most frequent consonantal-vocalic (CV) structures of Czech two-syllable stress-groups were selected for the purpose of this study: CVCV, CVCCV, and CCVCV. In an auditory experiment, which contained the mutual comparison of stress-groups or the comparison of a stress-group and a low-frequency shadow of a stress-group, the respondents established how similar the rhythmic pattern of each couple of stress-groups sounded. The results indicate that the position of a consonantal cluster within the stress-group is the strongest phonotactic factor in perception of the rhythmic similarity. The number of consonants within a consonantal cluster and the presence of a long vowel in both stress-groups are considered weaker factors for perceiving the rhythmic similarity by the respondents. Possibilities for a follow-up research are proposed for the factors that did not reach statistical significance, i.e., the difference in sonority or voicing of consonants.

1. Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

2. Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2018). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [computer program], version 6.0.30. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org.

3. Borovičková, B. & Maláč, M. (1967). The Spectral Analysis of Czech Sound Combinations. Prague: Academia.

4. Brigner, W. L. (1988). Perceived duration as a function of pitch. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1988, 67, 301-302. CrossRef

5. Castleman, W. A. & Diehl, R. L. (1996). Effects of fundamental frequency on medial and final [voice] judgments. Journal of Phonetics, 24(4), 383-398. CrossRef

6. Cumming, R. (2011). The effect of dynamic fundamental frequency on the perception of duration. Journal of Phonetics, 39, 375-387. CrossRef

7. Dankovičová, J. & Dellwo, V. (2007). Czech speech rhythm and the rhythm class hypothesis. In: Proceedings of the XVIth ICPhS, 1241-1244. Saarbrücken: Organizing Committee.

8. Dauer, R. (1983). Stress-timing and syllable-timing reanalyzed. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 11, 51-62.

9. Dawson, C., Aalto, D., Šimko, J. & Vainio, M. (2017). The influence of fundamental frequency on perceived duration in spectrally comparable sounds. PeerJ, 5. CrossRef

10. Donovan, A. & Darwin, C. J. (1979). The perceived rhythm of speech. In: Fischer-Jørgensen, E. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of IXth ICPhS, 268-274. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.

11. Fletcher, J. (2010). The Prosody of Speech: Timing and Rhythm. In: Hardcastle, W., Laver, J. & Gibbon, F. (Eds.), The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, 523-602. United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing. CrossRef

12. Grabe, E. & Low, E. L. (2002). Durational variability in speech and the rhythm class hypothesis. In: Warner, N. & Gussenhoven, C. (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology 7, 515-546. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossRef

13. Grossberg, S. (2003). Resonant neural dynamics of speech perception. Journal of Phonetics, 31(3-4), 423-445. CrossRef

14. Hogan, J. T. & Rozsypal, A. J. (1980). Evaluation of vowel duration as a cue for the voicing distinction in the following word-final consonant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 1764-1771. CrossRef

15. Churaňová, E. (2012). Fonotaktická osnova českého slova a mluvního taktu. Master's thesis. Prague: Charles University.

16. Churaňová, E. (2013). The consonantal-vocalic structure of the Czech word and stress group. AUC Philologica 1/2014, Phonetica Pragensia XIII, 79-90.

17. Kelso, J. A. (1995). Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior. Cambridge: MIT Press.

18. Kent, R. D. & Read, C. (2002). The acoustic analysis of speech. Australia: Singular/Thomson Learning.

19. Lehiste, I. (1977). Isochrony reconsidered. Journal of Phonetics, 5, 253-263.

20. Lehiste, I. (1979). Temporal relations within speech units. In: Fischer-Jørgensen, E. et al. (Eds.). Proceedings of IXth ICPhS, 241-244. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.

21. Machač, P. (2006). Temporální a spektrální struktura českých explozív. PhD thesis. Prague: Charles University.

22. Morton, J., Marcus, M. & Frankish, C. (1976). Perceptual centres (P-centres). Psychological Review, 83, 405-408. CrossRef

23. Palková, Z. (1994). Fonetika a fonologie češtiny. Prague: Karolinum.

24. Pike, K. L. (1945). The intonation of American English. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor.

25. Pollák, P., Volín, J. & Skarnitzl, R. (2007). HMM-Based Phonetic Segmentation in Praat Environment. In: Proceedings of the XIIth International Conference "Speech and computer - SPECOM 2007", 537-541.

26. Ramus, F., Nespor, M. & Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73(3), 265-292. CrossRef

27. Repp, B. H. (2005). Sensorimotor synchronization: A review of the tapping literature. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(6), 969-992. CrossRef

28. Skarnitzl, R. (2010). Prague Phonetic Corpus: status report. AUC Philologica 1/2009, Phonetica Pragensia XII, 65-67.

29. Šimko, J., Aalto, D., Lippus, P., Włodarczak, M. & Vainio, M. (2015). Pitch, perceived duration and auditory biases: comparison among languages. In: Proceedings of the 18th ICPhS. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.

30. Šturm, P. & Volín, J. (2016). P-centres in natural disyllabic Czech words in a large-scale speech-metronome synchronization experiment. Journal of Phonetics, 55, 38-52. CrossRef