Content uploaded by Dusan Nikolic
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dusan Nikolic on Apr 28, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Dušan Nikolić
University of Niš
Faculty of Philosophy
TONE AND BREAK-INDEX (TOBI) THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK APPLICATIONS WITH EFL SPEAKERS
Author Note
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dušan
Nikolić, University of Niš, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of
English, Ćirila i Metodija 2, 18220 Niš
Contact: dusannikolic92@yahoo.com
TONE AND BREAK-INDEX (TOBI) THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK APPLICATIONS WITH EFL SPEAKERS
Abstract: Tone and Break-index (ToBI) theoretical framework is a largely used
theory for describing prosodic features of speech. It was introduced into the theory
of speech by Beckman and Pierrehumbert (1986) whose aim was to provide a more
comprehensive phonetic framework of prosody and meaning. Since it has been
chiefly applied in an ESL context our goal was to investigate its contribution to the
analysis of certain prosodic features in an EFL context. Therefore, we tested the
framework’s applicability by analyzing the acoustic properties of intonation features
used in speech by EFL learners. In the study, we recorded Serbian EFL learners and
highly-competent American speakers who were required to read a dialogue. The
acoustic analysis was performed within the ToBI theoretical framework of analysis
and description and the traditional Halliday’s (1967) five-tone theory to determine
whether there were any major differences, similarities and inconsistencies in the
descriptions of the two. The results indicated that the ToBI theory could just as well
be employed as a theoretical background in prosodic experiments with EFL learners,
for it provided a holistic account of the target intonation features. The present study
also put forward certain implications regarding the future direction of ToBI.
Keywords: ToBI, theoretical framework, discourse intonation, EFL learners
1. Introduction
One of the most recent theoretical frameworks that allots a great
deal of its theoretical concepts to the description of prosody is the Tone
and Break Indices (ToBI) framework, a widely used model for transcribing
prosodic features of speech (Pitrelli et al., 1994). The framework was made
widely accessible in the linguistic research after the series of workshops held
in the period of 1991 to 1994 whose aim was to establish a systematic
description of core elements of prosodic components across languages
(Beckman et al. 2005). During the workshops, theoreticians and academics
from multiple scientific disciplines gathered and worked intensely towards
developing ToBI. Even though there are ToBI annotation systems nowadays
in “other varieties of English (e.g,, Mayo, Aylett and Ladd 1997
[Glasgow]) and in other languages (e.g., Grice, Reyelt, Benzmüller and
Batliner 1996 [German]; Venditti 1997 [Japanese])” (in Beckman et al.,
2005: 9), the Mainstream American English (MAE) ToBI is perhaps the
most comprehensively studied and researched framework. The scholars
who developed the framework followed the basic principles of the
autosegmental phonology (Goldsmith, 1976). ToBI, therefore, emerged
from the autosegmental models of prosodic investigation, and represented
one of the most appealing and relatively straightforward prosody-
transcription methods (Chun, 2002).
Within the ToBI framework, the most examined prosodic element
has been intonation. In particular, Pierrehumbert and Hirschberg (1990)
provided a holistic description of intonation in their study, whereby they
indicated that the intonation annotation should be carried out by referring
to four main elements: (1) stress, (2) tunes, (3) phrasing, and (4) pitch
range. The primitives of the entire system are accents and tones which are
typically divided into pitch accents, and phrasal tones, and include the
combination of high (H) and low (L) tones. Pitch accents and phrasal
tones compose (a) intermediate and (b) intonational phrases, whereby the
latter (which we will be using in this study) consist of one or more
intermediate phrases, and the boundary tone (%), which is the additional
H or L tone at the end of the phrase. Thus, an example of the entire
intonational phrase would be described as indicated below:
This is Mrs. Adams.
H* H* L-L%
This pattern usually marks a neutral declarative sentence whereby
H* is the pitch accent, L- is the phrase accent and L% the boundary tone.
On the other hand, an interrogative yes no contour would most likely
consist of L* H H%.
Is that Mrs. Adams?
L* H H%
The pattern depends on the content and the intended message the
speaker (S) wants to convey to the hearer (H). Therefore, the
combinations of tones should not be considered immutable, for it is
frequently claimed that the intonation patterns are largely “dependent on
the type of the situation involved” (Chun, 2002: 53).
1.1. Previous Research
ToBI-based research on intonation description has been well-
documented in literature. Most of research has chiefly focused on
interpreting intonation structures within multiple languages, such as
Japanese, Chinese, Italian, Croatian, etc. (Beckman and Pierrehumbert,
1986; Pierrehumbert and Hirschberg, 1990; Silverman et al. 1992; Avesani,
1995; Beckman et al., 2005; Volk, 2012;). With respect to the research on
L2, scholars have focused on relying on ToBI to explore a variety of
prosodic phenomena. Jun and Oh (2000) investigated the intonation structure
of Korean and how it was produced by American speakers. The findings
showed that the American speakers, regardless of their proficiency levels,
could not produce surface tones at the level of accentual phrase (AP), which
indicated that foreign speakers acquired phonological features of intonation
before phonetic properties. Therefore, proficiency levels were not critical
conditions for a native-like production of tones. Huang and Jun (2011)
compared the use of prosodic components between three groups of native
Mandarin speakers, who varied in age of arrival (AoA), and American
speakers. They employed MAE_ToBI to model the prosodic transcription.
The participants were recorded reading a paragraph, whereby the authors’
objective was to analyze speech rate, foreign accent rates, and intonation.
The results indicated that AoA had a significant influence upon the L2
prosody, although its influence varied in strength among different prosodic
components.
Pejčić (2014) was one of the few who explored the intonation use as
a discourse structure marker by applying the ToBI theoretical framework
within the EFL context. The paper concluded that the argument-topic final
intonation phrases were characterized by the exaggerated use of high
boundary tones and rising nuclear tones, which were especially typical of
female speakers. In the same vein, Xia and Mu (2008) elaborated on the use
of boundary tones of the Chinese EFL learners. The authors investigated
turn-taking cues at the EFL learners by analyzing the speakers’ boundary
tones at the given conversation tokens. Based on the analysis, the study
(2008) could conclude that there were certain deviations as to the usage of
the cues, for the majority of the participants employed the L-L%
combination of the phrase accent and the boundary tone. The patterns of the
yes/no question intonation contours at Chinese EFL students were explored
by Ji et al. (2009), whereby the authors found that the interrogative pitch
contours were similar to those of statements, for a wide range of participants
used both H% and L% boundary tones.
From a brief review of some of the studies that employed ToBI in
their analyses, it can be inferred that ToBI could serve as a theoretical
framework for refined analytical techniques to describe fine-tuned prosodic
features, both in L2 and EFL context. Additionally, previous research has
illustrated that ToBI is more than acceptable framework for investigating the
use of prosodic components at above-sentential level, i.e. at discourse level.
2. Present Study
Relying on the well-described ToBI theoretical approach and its
functions in relation to the discourse intonation use, the present study’s
objective is to implement this framework to analyze the textual/interactive
discourse function of the intonation (Chun, 2002). In particular, the
following three discourse intonation cues will be evaluated: topic initial,
finality, and continuity cues, which are in turn deemed highly significant for
one’s use of intonation within discourse (ibid.). In this regard, the analysis
attempts to answer the two most relevant research questions:
1) How do Serbian EFL speakers use certain discourse intonation
cues?
2) Could ToBI framework be applied in the EFL research context
upon analyzing discourse intonation contours?
2.1. Methodology
2.1.1. Materials
For the purposes of the present study, high-quality equipment was
used to record the participants reading the text. The productions were
recorded in a sound recorder, and processed and analyzed in Speech Filing
System (SFS) (Huckvale et al., 1987) computer software. The selection of
the corpus implied choosing the text that would contain all the previously
established intonation cues within discourse. The text used for reading was
obtained from John Robinson’s blog “ESL audio files” (2016) (Appendix).
The dialogue emulated a phone call conversation between a student’s parent
and a teacher, and a parent and a counsellor. The study divided the sentences
into Intonation phrases (IPs) by using SFS. The phrases were further
analyzed independently from the rest of the text.
2.1.2. Participants and Procedure
The study involved two groups of participants: (1) control, and (2)
experiment group. The former included two American speakers, while the
experiment group subsumed six Serbian EFL students of the Faculty of
Philosophy, University of Niš. All the students completed at least seven (out
of eight) semesters at the Department of English; hence, their proficiency
level was considered to be around C1 to C2 (CEF). They were thus
considered to be highly-competent EFL speakers. Both groups of
participants contained only female speakers between 21 and 26 (M = 23.75)
Participants were required to read the dialogue assuming roles A or
B. Participants did not switch roles for the purposes of avoiding any priming
effects. Prior to the task, participants had been told to relax as much as they
could and to read their roles as many times as they needed, for their most
optimal performance was the goal. In addition, although the study could not
account for the participants’ physical, psychological and emotional states, no
signs of physical fatigue and emotional exhaustion were noticed.
2.1.3. Measurements
The study was divided into two parts. Each discourse intonation cue
underwent the ToBI-based description and the analysis predicated on more
traditional description methods such as Halliday’s five-tone system (1967)
and Brazil’s concept of key and terminal pitch (1997). Both segments of the
study consisted of the acoustic measurements which focused on F0 values
and pitch range values, the most crucial indicators of one’s use of discourse
intonation cues (Chun, 2002). Each of the acoustic measurements was based
on pitch analysis functions F0 track, F0 estimate, and F0 smoothing (in
SFS). The selected intonation phrases were marked and labelled using the
ToBI transcription system and labelling guide constructed by Beckman and
Ayers (1997). Therefore, the acoustic analysis (following the ToBI
transcription method), and the ToBI labelling guide were employed so as to
render relevant results. In this way, the findings could also indicate whether
ToBI system could be ‘self-standing’ in the EFL discourse intonation
description analysis.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Topic initial cues
Upon exploring topic initial discourse intonation cues, the focus was
on the first pitch accent of the selected intonation phrases. According to their
syntactic and semantic meaning, the following three topic starting units and
their initial pitch accent types were selected for the analysis.
This is Mrs. Adams.
Hello, Mrs. Adams.
I’m Judy Wells.
The selected utterances were produced by the participants only
belonging to the group A. Members of the group B did not start any of the
four dialogues, which was why they were not analyzed on this cue. Even
though Brown et al. (1980) claimed that the hearers responding to the first
utterance replied in a somewhat wide pitch range, in order for the further
complexities to be avoided, the group B speakers were left out of this part of
analysis.
Table 2 displayed the values received from the measurements,
wherefrom it could be observed that the pitch distances were converted into
semitones, for it was frequently maintained that “pitch distances are more
relevant than absolute pitch…For this reason it is often useful to measure
pitch in semitones rather than in Hertz, the semitone scale being just one
possible log scale derived from the Hertz scale” (Nooteboom, 1997: 645).
The analysis revealed that every participant used high (H*) first pitch accent
type, which further indicated the standard use of this intonation cue by the
experiment group participants. Based on the previous research findings, it
was assumed that the topic starters would be signaled by relatively high
pitch peaks and a wide pitch range (Brown et al., 1980; Chun, 2002;
Paunović and Savić, 2008).
Table 2 – ToBI-based analysis of topic initial cues
Participant
s
Pitch accent
type
1st Pitch accent
range (Hz.)
1st pitch
accent
mean (Hz.)
1st Pitch accent
range (St)
1H* 239 – 368 315 7.5
3H* 178 – 318 261 10
5H* 171 – 249 199 6.5
7 H* 197 – 283 241 6.3
Firstly, the findings revealed that most of the participants employed
H* pitch accents to communicate the beginning of the new topic, which was
considered to be a clear indication of topic ‘initiality’ (Chun, 2002).
Secondly, pitch range values suggested rather paradoxical findings in
relation to the results received on tone use (H*). Namely, there were two
participants whose average pitch range values were below 7 ST, while there
was only one whose pitch range was around 10 ST. In addition, 7.5 ST pitch
range was registered at the control group participant, all of which indicated
an idiosyncratic use of the topic-starting cues by the participants, for,
although it was considered that anything above 3 ST was perceptually
relevant (Paunović and Savić, 2008), the pitch range was not as high as
expected. Paunović and Savić (2008), for example, alongside their acoustic
measurements, included the researchers’ perception, that is, their judgement
on whether participants clearly indicated the topic starting cue or not. Their
work showed that participants whose semitone difference was below 10 ST
either had ambiguously or not clearly indicated this cue (ibid.). Although it
could be said that the two experiment group participants of the present study
exhibited only slight issues with signaling the cue, this inference was
inconclusive since the control group participant used narrower pitch range
levels on the first pitch accent, too (7.5 ST).
To draw parallels with other intonation description systems, the
study analyzed topic initial cues by using Halliday’s (1967) five-tone system
(which represented the standardized intonation description model) and
Brazil’s (1997) concept: key.
Table 3 revealed the type of measurements and the results received
after the analysis. What was noticeable was that most of the participants
started a new topic with rising intonation and in high key. There were several
instances of level tones, though. Halliday (1967) claimed that these were
usually followed by a slight rise, which was the case in almost all the
examples. In addition, several mid-key tones were registered at the
participants 5 and 7 whose pitch range was not as high as that of the
participants 1 and 3. Therefore, the results on the usage of key indicated the
same ‘hiccups’ the participants were experiencing while producing topic
initial phrases, for mid-key tones were not considered to be a denotation of a
clear topic introduction. This, in turn, corresponded to the results obtained
from the ToBI analysis.
Table 3 – Halliday’s tone movement and key measurements
Participants Tone (movement) Key
1Rising 3x High key 3x
3Rising 2x
Level High key 3x
5
Rising
Fall-rise
Level
High key 2x
Mid-key
7Rising 2x
Fall-rise
High key 2x
Mid-key
Overall, the majority of participants used relatively clear discourse
intonation signals to mark the initiation of the topic. Figures 1 and 2
illustrated how the control group participant and experiment group
participant used F0 (pitch) levels within the topic-starting intonation phrase.
Figure 2 – Experiment group participant’s use of topic initial cues
Figure 1 – Control group participant’s use of topic initial cues
3.2. Turn-finality cues
Insights from the literature and previous research on the use of
intonation turn-finality cues suggested that turn-yielding cues were typically
characterized by lowering of the F0 contour, i.e. a drop in pitch. It was found
“that the sentence declination (lowering of F0 across an utterance to mark
sentence end) and the downstepped contour (successively lower pitch peaks
towards the end of the paragraph) are important signals for turn finality”
(Chun 2002: 37). The F0 lowering translated into ToBI terminology meant
the use of low (L%) boundary tones to signal finality. The participants were
expected to employ lower boundary tones (L%) at the end of intonation
phrases, usually preceded by low (L-) pitch accents or at least the
combination of high (H-) phrase accents and low boundary tones (L%) to
signal the end of one’s turn, for the H boundary level tone was characterized
as the turn-keeping signal (Caspers, 2003). In addition, a downstepped
contour was transcribed as H+H! whereby the ‘!’ denoted the “second accent
peak lower than the preceding peak” (Beckman and Ayers 1997: 24), which
was triggered by the speaker’s “compression of the pitch range that reduces
the F0 targets for any H tones subsequent to the specification of the
downstep” (ibid.: 24).
The utterances that underwent the investigation were carefully
chosen so as to syntactically denote declarative sentences. The following six
utterances were selected:
A: …that would be great.
A: …the school counselor.
A: …he failed to finish a book report.
B: …and schedule the meeting.
B: …that his English teacher is present.
B: ...I see him struggling with it.
The overall findings were shown in Table 4, which revealed the
boundary tone type (%), pitch range and the average pitch expressed both in
Hz and semitones (ST), and the downstepped contour (if there was any).
Table 4 – Turn-finality cues
Partici
pants
Boundary tone
type (%)
Boundary tone
pitch range
(Hz)
Boundary tone pitch
(average Hz and ST)
Downst
epped
H+!H
1 L% 124 – 218 172 Hz
9.7 ST
/
2 L% 96 – 207 149 Hz
13.3 ST
1x
3 L% & H% 77 – 278 143 Hz
22 ST
/
4 L% 83 – 230 157 Hz
17.6 ST
/
5 L% 71 – 184 131 Hz
16.4 ST
/
6H% & L% 131 – 220 176 Hz
9 ST
/
7 L% & H% 91 – 308 178 Hz
21.1
/
8 L% & H% 79 – 255 194 Hz
20.3 ST
/
Based on the boundary tone type, it could be noticed that most of the
participants showed high levels of awareness of turn-final discourse
intonation cues, for most of the participants used low boundary tones (L%).
A couple of experiment group participants were reported to have high
boundary tones. For example, the participant 3 expressed a surprise by using
this tone. Since the meaning and the illocutionary force of the utterance
could have been interpreted as a surprise, this was not taken to be an
anomaly. Three participants in total (No. 6, 7, and 8), each of whom used
high tones only once, did not express any particular mood by using high
tones nor were the speakers’ high boundary tones preceded by low tones as
an indication of an indirect question. What indicated the use of high
boundary tones was the fact that the ToBI description model assumed that
low tones were the speaker’s baselines, which were usually very low in one’s
pitch spectrum. Moreover, the lexical items with relatively higher boundary
tones were preceded by vowels with higher pitch levels (e.g. /i:/ in meeting).
All the participants produced wide pitch ranges on boundary tones, the
property of speech quite unexpected since the pitch range was said to usually
drop at the turn-relinquishing signals (Hurley, 1992, Chun, 2002). Still, with
respect to a downstepped movement, only once was such a contour used by
the American participant, which rendered this intonation feature peripheral
to turn-finality signal indication.1
Much as it could be said that descriptions predicated on other
theoretical models could be omitted, the paper did employ Halliday’s (1967)
approach followed by key and terminal pitch contour measurements (Table
6), for it was maintained that these features should fully determine whether
the speakers used the intonation cues according to certain standards (Chun,
2002). Table 5 displayed the results received based on different description
methods.
1 The cause of the lack of downstepped contour use could be the intrinsic
syntactic and lexical content of the intonational phrases.
Table 5 – Turn-finality cues described by using more traditional
intonation description methods
Participant
s
Average range (Hz
and ST)
Tone
movement
Key Terminal
pitch
173.6 Hz
9.5 ST
Fall 3x Low (L) Low
2128 Hz
12.1 St
Fall 2x
Level
Low (L) Low
3
84 Hz
9.9 ST
Level
Fall
Rise
Low
(creak)
Mid
Low
Mid
High
4220 Hz
21.8 St
Fall 3x
Low Low
585 Hz
9.93 ST
Fall 2x
Level
Mid (2x)
Low
Low
6
67 Hz
5.7 St
Level
Fall
Fall – rise
Low Low
7
102 Hz
12.4 ST
Fall 2x
Level
High
Mid
Low
Low
terminal
873 Hz
5.9 St
Level
Fall 2x
High High
First of all, what needed to be stressed was the distinction in the use
of the two description models regarding the pitch range measurements. ToBI
pitch range measurements focused on the evaluations of the tones. Thus,
boundary tone pitch ranges were the most relevant in this regard. The pitch
range measurements employed by more traditional description methods
relied heavily on the first pitch peak, i.e. on the first stressed syllable pitch
values, and the last vowel of the tone unit (Paunović and Savić, 2008).
Hence, the results obtained by following these guidelines had to be different
from the ones obtained by using the ToBI system.
In terms of pitch ranges the participants employed, they were, on
average, significantly lower than expected (for a detailed comparison, see
the average ranges obtained by Paunović and Savić, 2008). Participants 6
and 8, in particular, exhibited extremely narrow pitch ranges, suggesting that
their signaling of turn-finality cues was rather unclear. Secondly, as a result
of the tone movement measurements (Table 6), it could be claimed that the
majority of the participants expressed proper tone movements within an
utterance. There were only two instances of rising tones, one of which
indicated an interrogative form, while the second was a combination of the
fall – rise contour, typical of the interrogative structures, too. Even though
Shaffer (1984) acknowledged that the falling tones usually characterized
turn-yielding cues, the author admitted that rising F0 may have been a
stronger indicator of the end of one’s turn than the falling F0. Thirdly, the
key evaluations (Figure 3) showed that only two participants completed their
utterances in high keys, which were not considered to be characteristic of
turn finality. Still, the majority of speakers used low keys, some of which
were followed by a laryngeal creak regularly related to finality cues within
discourse intonation (Paunović and Savić, 2008). Lastly, the majority of the
participants used low terminal pitches which were considered to be clear
signals of turn finality as well.
Table 6 – Number of different tones used
Tone type No. of tones
Fall 16
Level 6
Rise 1
Fall-rise 1
Low Mid-level High
0
5
10
15
20
25
18
42
22
1 1
Key
Terminal
pitch
Figure 3. The number of key and terminal pitch contours used
In general, three important observations could be made. Firstly, the
majority of the experiment group speakers did properly use turn-finality cues
to indicate the ending of their sentences. Secondly, the ToBI theoretical
framework followed by acoustic measurements was self-sufficient for
investigating turn-finality discourse intonation cues. Yet, different
observations were made regarding pitch range values when using other
intonation description models. Lastly, although the study employed
Halliday’s (1967) five-tone system, supported by Brazil’s (1997) notion of
high, mid, and low key tones and terminal pitches (Table 5), ToBI system
could easily supplement, if not entirely replace, these description models
because the labelling of the pitch accent, phrase accent, plus a boundary tone
accompanied by pitch range measurements could yield quite a
comprehensive exploration of the given tokens.
3.3. Continuity Cues
The research into discourse intonation showed that the continuation
was realized in American English in “one of several ways: one type of
continuing contour is realized by a terminal pitch that rises slightly from its
beginning at low or mid-level; another type remains level; another is realized
by a terminal pitch that falls slightly, but not low enough to be considered
final” (Chun 2002: 44). Therefore, the participants of the present study were
expected to use either high phrase accents (H-) or low phrase accents (L-),
followed by either low (L%) or high (H%) boundary tones. In fact, Beckman
and Ayers (1997) referred to a combination of L- phrase accent and H%
boundary tone as a ‘continuation rise’. Although the combination of H-
phrase accents and H% boundary tones may have also indicated a yes/no
question structure, it was assumed that this compound would have signaled
continuity as long as boundary tones were not as high as in interrogatives.
The following intonation phrases were meticulously selected among
the corpus to represent the examples where continuity was expected:
A: Will you call me…
A: I’m Tom Parker…
A: For one thing…
B: I’ll call you tomorrow…
B: I’ll make sure…
It could be thus observed from Table 7 and Figure 6 that most of the
participants adequately used intonation to indicate continuity, for the
majority of speakers used the combinations of tones referred to above. The
measurements showed that high boundary tones were not as high as in
questions, which could corroborate the findings based on labeling the phrase
endings. In addition, lowering of the intonation pitch which characterized
some of the participants’ speech did not signal finality since tones did not
experience a marked fall so as to denote turn-yielding cues instead of
continuity cues. There were a couple of anomalies though. Some participants
used a narrower pitch range than expected (4 ST and 5 ST), which implied
certain attitudinal uses of intonation rather than discoursal continuation.2 In
addition, one of the participants used an L- phrase accent and an L%
2 See the Limitations of the study
boundary tone which might have indicated finality instead of continuity,
whereas the typical ‘continuation rise’ contour was used only twice.
Table 7 – Continuity cues analyzed within the ToBI theoretical framework
Participant
s
Phrase and boundary tone
combination
Boundary
tone
Range
Boundary tone range
average (Hz and ST)
1 H-L% 2x
H-H%
166-333 243 Hz
12.05 ST
2 H-L% 2x 332 – 200 266 Hz
8.7 ST
3 L-H%
L-L%
H-L%
71 - 266 195 Hz
22.9 ST
4 L-H%
H-H%
164 – 375 241 Hz
14.3 ST
5 H-H% 3x 178 – 225 202 Hz
4 ST
6 H-L%
H-H%
262 – 196 229 Hz
5 ST
7 H-H% 2x
H-L%
333-89 212
22.8
8 H-L%
H-H%
276-190 234 Hz
L-H% L-L% H-L% H-H%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
21
89
Boundary tone combinations
Figure 6. The number of boundary tone combinations used
The study applied other description methods in order to check and
compare the findings received from the ToBI theoretical framework. Relying
on Halliday’s (1967) five-tone system, Brazil’s (1997) key, and Chun’s
(2002) continuity cues description, the paper managed to obtain the results
expressed in Table 7. The table showed what kind of tone movements were
most regularly used to indicate continuity and what kind of key was applied
to the tones. According to Chun (2002), all movement types were equally
adequate (even falling tones, as long the fall was not that sharp and deep as
in ‘finality’ cues). What could suggest an inadequate use of continuity was
falling intonation that indicated a laryngeal creak, which was characteristic
of finality cues. Two participants were recorded to have used such intonation
cues. Since only one participant used low keys it could be said that the
majority satisfied in this respect. Therefore while the key and tone
movements were deemed appropriate, the measurements of pitch ranges
listed above in Table 6 suggested the discrepancy between the two analyses
since the pitch range of the participants 5 and 6 were quite narrow.
Furthermore, the participants of the present study, unlike in some other
studies (Paunović and Savić, 2008), used key appropriately to signal
continuation.
Table 7 – Halliday’s system – measurements of continuation
Participants Tone movement Key
1 Rise /
Fall \
High
2 Fall \ High
3 Rise /
Fall (creak)
High
Low (2x)
4 Rise \
Level –
Mid
5 Rise – Fall / \
Level –
High
6 Fall \
Level –
Mid
7 Rise /
Fall (creak) \
High
8 Fall \
Level –
High
In general, it could be said that the majority of the participants used
intonation properly upon articulating continuity. Furthermore, even though
ToBI annotating system and the measurements revealed that ToBI could be
used without being followed by other intonation description models, it
should be emphasized that other descriptive methods would additionally
strengthen the present theoretical framework.
4. Theoretical Contributions
In the past few decades, ToBI theoretical framework has not only
been used in research, but it has been proven extremely applicable
(Beckman and Pierrehumbert, 1986, 1990; Pitrelli et al., 1994; Ladd
2008). The contributions of ToBI to the EFL research context, albeit a rather
novel concept, and relatively unexplored, can be manifold.
Namely, what this study has shown is that discourse intonation cues
can be explored by relying on this framework. The framework posits a clear-
cut relationship between multiple prosodic structures (Selkirk, 1986), which,
in turn, informs researchers of the relationship of different levels of
utterance. Such a set-up is of critical significance for investigating intonation
cues that are manifested at the level of discourse. Unlike the traditional
models (Halliday, 1967), ToBI provides an insight into hierarchical prosodic
structure which holds that different levels of hierarchy exhibit distinct
properties. Some features are thus directly influenced by syntax, while others
function at the level of phonology (see Selkirk, 1986 for discussion).
In addition, the theory introduces slightly different terminology (e.g.,
phrase accents and boundary tones), which is believed to be much more
comprehensive than the ones used in some of the previous models. A case in
point, and a quite important term for the current study, is a downstepped
contour, which illustrates the pattern of gradual tone lowering across the
utterance (Beckman and Ayers, 1997). Such contour shows whether the
utterance is declarative, what one’s level of final lowering in the sentence is,
and it can indicate the intended message the speaker wants to convey.
Lastly, this theoretical framework cannot merely be used in EFL
research context for investigating a wide range of prosodic phenomena, but
it can also be the basis for certain educational paradigm. Namely Estebas-
Vilaplana (2013) has developed a new methodological approach for teaching
and learning English intonation that would entirely rely on ToBI. The
proposal aims at raising awareness at EFL learners about the use of tunes in
English intonation. Hoping to facilitate EFL learners’ perception and
production of English intonation, the approach deploys ToBI framework.
5. Conclusion
Relating the study back to the most relevant research questions, the
paper makes two important. First of all, Serbian EFL participants display an
adequate level of use of three discourse intonation cues: topic initial, turn-
finality, and continuity cues. As extremely relevant discourse intonation
markers, these cues are found to be crucial in communication. Intonation,
unless used properly, could lead to misunderstanding in communication. The
only slight issue that Serbian participants have exhibited is the use of pitch
range, which appears to be lower than that of American participants.
Second, ToBI theoretical framework has been successfully used in
the present study, and considering its contributions to the research, it can be
said that such framework could freely be employed in EFL research. The
framework has provided analytical features necessary for undertaking the
analysis of intonation in the context of EFL research, which was, prior to this
study, quite infrequently carried out.
5.1. Limitations of the study
In general, there were two main limitations as regards the present
study. Firstly, albeit the theoretical frameworks used were supported by
acoustic analyses, the descriptions should have been tested against the
hearers’ judgments or ratings on whether the participants used clear,
ambiguous, or unclear discourse intonation signals (see Paunović and Savić,
2008). The perception may differ from the acoustic findings, for the
measurements may detect what one’s auditory system does not or what one’s
auditory system renders insignificant. Therefore, the perceptual cues as to
how the participants used their intonation would have provided a well-
needed context to the entire work. Secondly, the analysis does lack statistical
parameters to confirm the observations. Instead of using a variety of
descriptive frameworks, ToBI could be supplemented by a comprehensive
statistical analysis of the data (e.g., ANOVA measurements, mixed-effects
regression model). This ought to be a direction the future research should
take in order for ToBI to be successfully employed in the EFL research
milieu.
References
Avesani, C. (1995). ToBIt: un sistema di trascrizione per l’intonazione
italiana. Atti delle 5e Giornate di Studio del Gruppo di Fonetica
Sperimentale (AIA), 85-98.
Beckman, M. E., & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (1986). Intonational structure in
Japanese and English. Phonology, 3, 255-309.
Beckman, M. E., & Ayers, G. (1997). Guidelines for ToBI labelling. The
OSU Research Foundation, 3, 30.
Beckman, M. E., Hirschberg, J. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2005). The
original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In S.
A. Jun (Eds.), Prosodic models and transcription: towards prosodic
typology (9-54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brazil, D. (1997). The communicative value of intonation in English book.
Cambridge University Press.
Brown, G., Currie, K. L., & Kenworthy, J. (1980). Questions of Intonation
(Croom Helm, London).
Caspers, J. (2003). Local speech melody as a limiting factor in the turn-
taking system in Dutch. Journal of Phonetics, 31(2), 251-276.
Chun, D. M. (2002). Discourse intonation in L2: From theory and research
to practice (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing.
Crystal, D. (1976). Prosodic systems and intonation in English (Vol. 1). CUP
Archive.
Estebas-Vilaplana, E. (2013). TL_ToBI: a new system for teaching and
learning intonation. Proceedings from PTLC 2013, 39-42.
Goldsmith, J. A. (1976). Autosegmental phonology. Bloomington: Indiana
University Linguistics Club.
Halliday, M. A. (1967). Intonation and Grammar in British English. The
Hague: Mouton.
Huckvale, M. A., Brookes, D. M., Dworkin, L. T., Johnson, M. E., Pearce,
D. J., & Whitaker, L. C. (1987). Proceedings from European
Conference on Speech Technology. The SPAR speech filing system.
Huang, B., & Jun, S. (2011). The Effect of Age on the Acquisition of Second
Language Prosody. Language and Speech, 54(3), 387-414.
Hurley, D. S. (1992). Issues in teaching pragmatics, prosody, and non-verbal
communication. Applied Linguistics, 13(3), 259-280.
Ji, X., Wang, X., & Li, A. (2009). Intonation patterns of yes-no questions for
Chinese EFL learners. Speech Database and Assessments, 2009
Oriental COCOSDA International Conference on, 88-93.
Jun, S. A., & Oh, M. (2000). Acquisition of second language intonation. In
Sixth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing.
Ladd, D. R. (2008). Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Nooteboom, S. (1997). The prosody of speech: melody and rhythm. The
handbook of phonetic sciences, 5, 640-673.
Paunović, T., & Savić, M. (2008). Discourse intonation-Making it work.
ELOPE; English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries,
5(1-2), 57.
Pejčić, A. (2014). Intonational Phrase Boundaries as Markers of
Argumentative Discourse in an EFL Debate Class. Proceedings from
Language, Literature and Culture 2013 (pp. 332-347). Niš, Serbia:
Faculty of Philosophy, University of Niš.
Pierrehumbert, J. & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The Meaning of Intonational
Contours in the Interpretation of Discourse. In P. R. Cohen, J. L.,
Morgan, & Pollack, M. E. (Eds.), Intentions in communication.
(271-311). Cambridge, MA. MIT press.
Pitrelli, J. F., Beckman, M. E., & Hirschberg, J. (1994). Evaluation of
prosodic transcription labeling reliability in the ToBI framework.
Proceedings from ICSLP 94: The Third International Conference
on Spoken Language Processing, 18-22 September, Yokohama,
Japan.).
Robinson, J., (2016), ESL Audio Files, Retrieved from:
http://eslaudio.blogspot.rs/2009/02/dialogue-workout-63.html,
accessed on 17 Feb. 2016.
Schaffer, D. (1984). The role of intonation as a cue to topic management in
conversation. Journal of Phonetics, 12(4), 327-344.
Selkirk, E. (1986). On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology,
3, 371-405.
Silverman, K., Beckman, M., Pitrelli, J., Ostendorf, M., Wightman, C., Price,
P., ... & Hirschberg, J. (1992). ToBI: A standard for labeling English
prosody. Proceedings from ICSLP 92: The Second International
Conference on Spoken Language Processing, 12-16 October, Banff,
Alberta, Canada.
Volk, J. (2012). Using the ToBI transcription to record the intonation of
Slovene. Linguistica, 52(1), 169-186.
XIA, Z. H., & MU, F. Y. (2008). A Study of Boundary Tone Use at Turn-
taking in Chinese EFL Learners' Conversations [J]. Journal of PLA
University of Foreign Languages, 1.
Appendix
A: This is Mrs. Adams. I’m concerned about my son’s grades.
B: Would you like us to schedule a conference with his teachers?
A: Yes, that would be great.
B: We’ll go ahead and schedule the meeting.
A: Will you call me when it has been set up?
B: Yes, I’ll call you tomorrow and let you know what time.
A: I’m mostly worried about his mark in English.
B: I agree, it’s quite bad. I’ll make sure that his English teacher is
present.
A: He did rather well in math.
If his math teacher can’t take part in it, that’s okay.
B: I’ll try my best to notify all his teachers.
A: I can come to a meeting any day except Thursday.
B: All right. I won’t ask them to come on Thursday.
A: Hello, Mrs. Adams. I’m tom parker the school counsellor.
B: Mr. Parker. I want to do what I can to help my son.
A: We’re all trying to help him. He’s having trouble with English.
B: I know that. I see him struggling with it.
A: His teacher tells me that Joe turns in homework late.
B: It’s very difficult for him to finish his homework on time.
A: I’m Judy wells, John’s English teacher.
B: what can we do to bring up John’s grades?
A: For one thing, he should turn in all his homework and do more
exercises before the classes.
B: Has he missed any tasks?
A: Yes, he has. Last week he failed to finish a book report.
B: Oh, dear. I didn’t know that.
A: Also, John is not very good at group work.
B: I will talk to him about group work, no problem.
Dušan Nikolić
PRIMENA “TONE AND BREAK-INDEX (TOBI)” TEORIJSKOG
OKVIRA SA GOVORNICIMA ENGLESKOG KAO STRANOG
JEZIKA
Rezime
‘Tone and Break-index’ (ToBI) je teorija u širokoj upotrebi koja se koristi prilikom
opisivanja prozodijske strukture govora. Bekman i Pierhumbert (1986) su je uveli u
teoriju govora sa ciljem da prilože opširniji fonteski okvir prozodije i značenja. S
obzirom da se često koristi u kontekstu engleskog kao drugog jezika, naš cilj je bio
da istažimo njen doprnos analizi određenih elemenata prozodije u kontekstu
engleskog kao stranog jezika. Stoga, ispitali smo primenjivost okvira tako što smo
analizirali akustičke parametre delova intonacije koji su koristili studenti engleskog
kao stranog jezika. Prilikom rada, snimili smo srpske student engleskog kao stranog
jezika i veoma kompetentne američke govornike čiji je zadatak bio da pročitaju
dijalog. Akustička analiza je izvedena u teoretskom okviru ‘ToBI-ja’ i koristeći
tradicionalni Holidejev (1967) tonski sistem od pet tonova, kako bismo odredili da li
postoje sličnosti i nedoslednosti u opisima dveju teorija. Rezultati ukazuju da ‘ToBI’
može biti korišćen u prozodijskim eksperimentima sa studentima engleskog kao
stranog jezika kao teoretska podloga, jer pruža detaljan uvid u ciljana intonacijska
svojstva govora. Ova studija takodje pruža određene nagoveštaju u kom pravcu bi
buduća istraživanja koja se tiču ovog Sistema trebalo da se kreću.
Ključne reči: ToBI, teorijski okvir, intonacija diskursa, učenici engleskog kao
stranog jezika
