This study explored how native speakers utilize intonation to produce French clause-combining complexes with causal conjunctions,particularly investigating how the prosodic realization would be affected by the narrati...This study explored how native speakers utilize intonation to produce French clause-combining complexes with causal conjunctions,particularly investigating how the prosodic realization would be affected by the narrative order of the cause and effect event,which conforms or conflicts with the iconic reasoning order,in a conversation with projected focus.Ten native French speakers were recruited to read aloud 68 question-answer pairs.The critical answer conveys volitional content causality consisting of a prior clause combined with a causal/consequence clause introduced by the conjunction car or donc,forming effect-cause(EC)or cause-effect(CE)order,respectively.It responds to either a why-question or a general question so that the focus position is manipulated.Results of clausal boundary intonation and the prosodic prominence placement were convergent:EC order and focus in the second clause increased uses of continuing boundary intonation and prominence on the second clause as compared with CE order and focus in the prior clause,as both factors showed main effects.Our finding is not supportive to the cognitive account predicting prosodic dissociation for non-iconic order;instead,it may shed light on the critical role of prosody in marking causality by highlighting the influence of contextualization cues.展开更多
基金supported by CASS Innovation ProgramCASS Innovation Program for young scholars
文摘This study explored how native speakers utilize intonation to produce French clause-combining complexes with causal conjunctions,particularly investigating how the prosodic realization would be affected by the narrative order of the cause and effect event,which conforms or conflicts with the iconic reasoning order,in a conversation with projected focus.Ten native French speakers were recruited to read aloud 68 question-answer pairs.The critical answer conveys volitional content causality consisting of a prior clause combined with a causal/consequence clause introduced by the conjunction car or donc,forming effect-cause(EC)or cause-effect(CE)order,respectively.It responds to either a why-question or a general question so that the focus position is manipulated.Results of clausal boundary intonation and the prosodic prominence placement were convergent:EC order and focus in the second clause increased uses of continuing boundary intonation and prominence on the second clause as compared with CE order and focus in the prior clause,as both factors showed main effects.Our finding is not supportive to the cognitive account predicting prosodic dissociation for non-iconic order;instead,it may shed light on the critical role of prosody in marking causality by highlighting the influence of contextualization cues.
