Prosody
The subject of prosody intersects with many different fields of study. Prosody is the linguistic study and application of the effects of intonation, pitch, volume and rhythm in the process of speech and interpersonal interactions. These are classified as elements that serve to modify conversations and provide emphasis, emotional input and responsorial cues in the give and take of communication. They are aspects of language that refine and eliminate obfuscation of oral content by introducing the effects of human speech and interpretation of material as well as the use of oratory skills in delivery of thought to the listener. Prosody serves as an integral element in both psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic studies as cognitive aspects of language acquisition and the physiological basis of the production of language are examined. Prosody is also emphasized in the study of versification in poetry and music. The oratory skills used in the public delivery of poetry and lyrics can also provide insight into speech production in the teaching of English as a second language classroom to increase understanding for the student of a foreign language. How can the study of the elements of prosody serve to further the teaching of English? Can the study of prosody be utilized in other fields of study such as speech therapy? This paper seeks to provide a survey of the use of prosody in various areas of study and how the research can provide insight to the uses of prosody in the fields of linguistics and the teaching of English as a second language.
Discussion
What is prosody and why is it an important part of linguistic study? Why is the study of prosody necessary for the teaching of English as a second language? Prosody refers to attributes of an utterance as well as the emotional state of a speaker and its representation in dialogue or physical gestural components that are relative to the content of speech being produced. The elements of prosody can be distinguished as acoustical attributes or auditory attributes according to Hirst and Di Cristo in their work Intonation Systems (1998). The acoustical elements can be scientifically measured by studying the soundwave frequency, the decibel level of the soundwave as well as its duration. The auditory focal points include timbre and loudness of the utterances as well as the pitch and duration of enunciation of the phonological elements of speech (Hirst, DeChristo).
Prosody serves to guide conversational structure and offers cues as to inclusion or exclusion in a conversation, turn taking as well as introduction of new material into the discourse according to David Brazil in his discussion of discourse and intonation (Brazil, Coulthard, Johns).
Other factors to consider in the study of prosody are the presence of allophones. Allophones are the collections of sounds that are possible for each phoneme and incorporate the availability of spoken sounds due to both syntax and the influence of the international character and the incomplete knowledge of students of the English language. Many of these variations in pronunciation are subconscious while others are the product of inexperience or even guessing by the student of the L2 language as he imitates native speakers of the language. The phonology inherent in ones L1 language can influence the pronunciation of the L2 language as the speaker draws upon his L1 experiences and searches for possibilities to choose from in the patterns of speech in common use in the L1 language. “The choice of one allophone rather than another may depend on such factors as communicative situation, language variety, and social class (Skanders, Burleigh).
These factors serve to influence the speaker and may produce a “foreign” accent which can stigmatize the speaker and lead to prejudice and discrimination. This effect underscores the need to stress proper pronunciation in an English as a Second Language curriculum and the need to focus more attention to the use of prosody in the production of the spoken word as well as body language in speech which some consider to be additional elements of prosody. Included in this grouping are hand gestures used during speech, bodily stance, facial expressions, eye contact, distance between speaker and listener to name a few. Contrast body language with mannerisms which are distracting to the listener and may indicate disfluency and hesitation in speech due to cognitive load and its effect on the speaker. Mannerisms may include self-touching, scratching, pacing, swaying and finger tapping among others (Tanveer, Hoque).
Prosodic features such as pitch, intonation and spacing of words are important attributes of caretakers of young children and help them to learn to interact.
“Motherese” describes the type of speech patterns used as one interacts with infants and toddlers. There is documentation of wide spread occurrence of this phenomenon that is cross cultural. Several features of motherese are important structures that an infant becomes aware of and is sensitive to. Changes in pitch and intonation as well as pausal placement in syntax can contrast similar syllabic phonemes and help the infant to distinguish the sounds as well as assimilate more input because of the shorter clausal usage (Grieser, Kuhl).
This line of thought lends support to Noam Chomsky’s theory of the language acquisition device which ascribes to children an innate, genetically enabled ability to acquire language at an early age. This viewpoint is specific to the nativist theory that “asserts that humans are born with the instinct or ‘innate facility’ for acquiring language” (Van Patten, Benati). Empiricism, on the other hand defines development as occurring through experiences and learning. The dichotomy of “nature versus nurture” continues to divide modern psychological theorists.
Alternately, if one views the effect of brain injury and the effects of alcoholism on the brain and its capacity for prosodic abilities even more evidence lends support to Chomsky’s theory in part. Consider motor aprosodia and expressive aprosodia which are relatively recent diagnoses of brain dysfunctions. Motor aprosodia is a physical condition that affects one’s ability to express affective aspects of prosody in conversational discourse. Vocal inflection, volume and pitch changes are suppressed by physiological damage to the brain or a failure in brain development (Ross, Monnot). “Producing these nonverbal elements requires intact motor areas of the face, mouth, tongue and throat. This area is associated with Brodmann areas 44 and 45 (Broca’s area) of the left frontal lobe. Damage to areas 44/45 produces motor aprosodia, with the nonverbal elements of speech being disturbed (facial expression, tone, rhythm of voice” (Miller, Collins, Kent).
Expressive aprosodia is a more social-cognitive condition rather than a psychomotor condition. The individual cannot produce respective cues that reflect a certain emotional expression. Both motor aprosodia and expressive aprosodia are organic in origin. (Williamson, Shenal, Demaree).
Alcoholism can create dysfunctions in prosodic expression, interpretation and processing of social cues in discourse as well. “An inability to process or exhibit emotions in a proper manner has been shown to exist in alcoholics and those who were exposed to alcohol while fetuses” (Monnot, Nixon, Lovallo, Ross). These prenatal obstructions to the proper development of the fetus are irreversible and may include physical deformities as well as social and psychological impairments and learning disabilities. The structure and activity of the brain in children with fetal alcohol syndrome has been observed through the use of electro encephalograms, MRI’s and other brain imaging software. The specific areas of the brain that are active in prosody, speech and communication activities have been identified. In addition to the previously mentioned conditions, multiple sclerosis has a debilitating effect on prosodic perception to a certain degree. The progression of the disease affects individuals differently in varying ways, however.
Nativist theories such as Noam Chomsky state that the human capacity for universal grammar is related to the presence of modules of neurons and substrates in the brain that assist the child during normal development to attain speech and language functions. The innate learning theory contrasts with a more empirical, Skinnerian view that language is acquired through imitation, reinforcement and shaping and modeling behavior that is engendered by the caregiver of the child (Chomsky).
Critics of nativist theory claim that it is unverifiable through trial and error and experimentation in the laboratory. Embracing a more empiricist approach, Kymissis and Poulson state that, “To the extent that we can experimentally analyze successively larger proportions of children's utterances within an operant-learning paradigm, it becomes less pressing to worry about non-learning language acquisition paradigms that in principle render their subject matter unavailable for experimentation” (Kymissis, Poulton).
Prosody is also a fundamental aspect of reading and interpretation. “Prosody, the defining feature of expressive reading, comprises all of the variables of timing, phrasing, emphasis, and intonation that speakers use to help convey aspects of meaning and to make their speech lively. One of the challenges of oral reading is adding back the prosodic cues that are largely absent from written language” (DeLey). In this respect, two of the key elements of second language acquisition, reading and speaking utilize prosodic elements such as syllabic accent, rhythm and meter of the spoken expression as the written word is interpreted orally.
Even more rarified is the concept of prosody as it is applied to poetry and prose. “The poet organizes structures of sound and rhythm into rhyme, stanzaic form, and, most importantly, metre. Indeed, the largest part of prosodical study is concerned with the varieties of metre, the nature and function of rhyme, and the ways in which lines of verse fall into regular patterns or stanzas” (Gross).
The formal practice of prosodic formulation has fallen by the wayside in modern literature although there are poets and writers who still resort to this literary tradition and equally important, how is one to interpret past literary works without a firm grasp of prosodic features? Gross continues by stating that dramatic verse makes greater use of prosodic elements as the literary form seeks an emotional response from the audience. Cheree Charmello states that “Imagery is the most easily recognizable literary device. Imagery is not limited to words that help to create an image, but also encompasses all of our senses, including sound. These images are created through unique word choice and are often embedded within other devices. Devices that help to create an image in the readers mind also help to create meaning. This includes the sounds that are created by the words and structure of a poem” (Charmello).
Conclusion
We can surmise that the various elements of prosody can be utilized in the classroom to engage the students and provide context, nonverbal cues, emotional intent of the speaker, emphasis of criteria in speech as well as elicitation of direction and inclusion of participants in conversational discourse. Exercises in pronunciation should be stressed and, included as well, should be discussion of other prosodic characteristics of spoken English that assist in proper interpretation of input. We have seen from its use in prose and poetry that discourse is enriched by the influence of prosody and its absence can cause misinterpretation of speech, suspicion, paranoia and aggression when the intent of the speaker is hampered by poor prosodic input or a lack of ability by the listener to interpret material effectively either through disability or inexperience. A redress and therapeutic examination of prosodic skills may serve to assist those who have experienced brain damage or who suffer from birth defects.
Works Cited
Brazil, David., Coulthard, Malcolm., Johns, Catherine. Discourse, Intonation and Language Teaching. Longman. 1980.
Charmello, Cheree. “The Sound Within: An Exploration of Prosodic Elements in Poetry”. Yale National Initiative, Yale University. 2018.
Chomsky, Noam. "A Review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior". Language. 1959.
pp. 26–58.
De Ley, Logan. “Why Prosody Matters: The Importance of Reading Aloud with Expression”. Scientific Learning. June 13, 2017.
www.scilearn.com/why-prosody-matters-importance-reading-aloud-expression/
Grieser, D., Kuhl, P. “Maternal Speech to Infants in a Tonal Language: Support for Universal Prosodic Features in Motherese”. Developmental Psychology. January 1988. pp. 14-20.
Gross, Harvey S. “Prosody: Literature”. Brittanica.
www.britannica.com/art/prosody accessed May 02, 2018.
Hirst, D., DiCristo, A. Intonation Systems. Cambridge Press.1998. p. 6.
Kymissis, E., Poulson, C. “The History of Imitation in Learning Theory: The Language Acquisition Process”. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1990. 54. p.156.
Miller, Lisa A., Collins, Robert L., Kent, Thomas A. "Language and the Modulation of Impulsive Aggression". The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 2008. 20 (3). pp. 261–73.
Monnot, M., Nixon, S., Lovallo W., Ross, E. “Altered Emotional Perception in Alcoholics: Deficits in Affective Prosody Comprehension”. Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research. 2001. pp. 362-369.
Ross, E., Monnot, M. “Neurology of Affective Prosody and its Functional Anatomic Organization in Right Hemisphere”. Brain and Language. January 2008. pp. 51-74.
Skandera, Paul., Burleigh, Peter. A Manual of English Phonetics and Phonology, Gunter Narr Verlag 2005. p. 45.
Tanveer, M., Zhao, R., Hoque M. “Automatic Identification of Non-Meaningful Body Movements and What It Reveals About Humans”. arXive. University of Rochester. New York 2017. p. 1.
Van Patten, Bill., Benati, Allesandro. Key Terms in Second Language Acquisition. Continuum Publishing 2010. p. 101.
Williamson, J., Harrison, D., Shenal, B., Rhodes, R., Demaree, H. “Quantitative EEG Diagnostic Confirmation of Expressive Aprosodia”. Applied Neuropsychology. October 2003. pp. 176-181.
