Cover not available

Article published In: Language, Interaction and Acquisition
Vol. 14:2 (2023) ► pp.247–279

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Another voice for another language?

The impact of language on vocal register

 | Toulouse Jean Jaurès University
 | Toulouse Jean Jaurès University
 | Toulouse Jean Jaurès University
Published online: 22 March 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.00018.dro
Abstract
This study examines crosslinguistic vocal register variations (pitch level and range) within speakers of L1 French-L2 English and L1 English-L2 French. Participants were recorded on three tasks: reading aloud, video retelling, and free speech, in both French and English. A separate analysis of the f 0 of voiced pauses in relation to vocal register is presented. The main hypothesis is that French is spoken on a higher vocal register than English, the difference being due to the divergent prosodic systems of the two languages, as opposed to an effect of the language status for the speaker (L1 or L2). The results partially confirm it, although the L1 and the task type influence the language effect. In addition, results indicate that pitch level and pitch range can vary independently; that the task has a significant effect on vocal register; and that the f 0 of voiced pauses is lower than the average speaking f 0, thus impacting its measure and raising methodological issues for the study of vocal register.
Résumé
L’étude présentée ici s’intéresse aux variations du registre vocal (hauteur et étendue de la voix) inter-langues, dans une analyse intra-sujets de locuteurs du français L1-anglais L2 et anglais L1-français L2. Le protocole expérimental inclut trois tâches : lecture à voix-haute, conversation informelle, narration sur support vidéo. Une analyse séparée de la f 0 des pauses voisées en relation avec le registre vocal est présentée. L’hypothèse principale est que le français est parlé sur un registre plus élevé que l’anglais, ceci étant dû aux différences prosodiques de ces langues, par opposition à un effet du statut de la langue pour le locuteur (L1 vs L2). Les résultats confirment partiellement cette hypothèse mais la L1 et le type de tâche nuancent l’effet de la langue. Les résultats montrent aussi que la hauteur et l’étendue de la voix peuvent varier indépendamment, que la tâche a un effet significatif sur le registre, et que la f 0 des pauses est plus basse que la hauteur moyenne du registre, soulevant des points méthodologiques.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.On vocal register and languages
    • 2.1Defining vocal register
    • 2.2Voiced pauses and vocal register
    • 2.3Languages and vocal register
    • 2.4Prosodic structure and L2 effect
      • 2.4.1French and English prosody
      • 2.4.2L2 effect
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Objectives and hypotheses
    • 3.2The B-FREN3 corpus
      • 3.2.1Participants
      • 3.2.2Tasks
      • 3.2.3Procedure
    • 3.3Data extraction and processing
      • 3.3.1Statistics
  • 4.Results and discussions
    • 4.1Spoken language effects on pitch level and range (within-subject)
      • 4.1.1Spoken language main effect
      • 4.1.2Interaction with L1
      • 4.1.3Interaction with task
      • 4.1.4Discussion on the spoken language variable (within-subject)
    • 4.2Voiced pauses pitch level (within-subject)
      • 4.2.1Spoken language main effect and relation to Mean Pitch Level
      • 4.2.2Discussion on the pauses pitch level
    • 4.3Main effects of secondary variables
      • 4.3.1L1 variable (between-subjects)
      • 4.3.2Task variable (within-subjects)
      • 4.3.3Results
  • 5.General conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (77)
References
Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Abu-Al-Makarem, A., & Petrosino, L. (2007). Reading and spontaneous speaking fundamental frequency of young Arabic men for Arabic and English languages: A comparative study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105(2), 572–580. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altenberg, E. P., & Ferrand, C. T. (2006). Fundamental frequency in monolingual English, bilingual English-Russian, and bilingual English-Cantonese young adult women. Journal of Voice, 201, 89–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aoyama, K., & Guion, S. G. (2007). Prosody in second language acquisition: An acoustic analysis on duration and F  range. In O. S. Bohn & M. Munro (Eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning (pp. 281–297). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Astésano, C. (2016). The prosodic characterization of reference French. In S. Detey, J. Durand, B. Laks, & C. Lyche (Eds.), Varieties of spoken French: A source book (pp. 68–85). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beckman, M. E. (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertrand, R., Blache, P., Espesser, R., Ferrée, C., Meunier, B., Priego-Valverde, B., & Rauzy, S. (2008). Le CID – Corpus of Interactional Data – Annotation et exploitation multimodale de parole conversationnelle. Traitement Automatique des Langues, 49(3), 1–30.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bissonnette, S. (2003). Le registre du lecteur de bulletin de nouvelles québécois et français: Un reflet de l’idéal vocal de ces communautés linguistiques? In M. Demers (Ed.), Registre et voix sociale (pp. 17–34). Nota Bene.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2019). Praat: doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.52, [URL]
Braun, A. (1994). Sprechstimmlage und Muttersprache [Pitch range and mother tongue]. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 21, 170–178.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campione, E., & Véronis, J. (1998). A statistical study of pitch target points in five languages. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 1998), paper 0845, Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Pauses and hesitations in French spontaneous speech. In Proceedings of DiSS’05, Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech. Aix-en-Provence, France, 43–46.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chevrie-Muller, C., Salomon, D., & Ferrey, G. (1971). Contribution à l’établissement de quelques constantes physiologiques de la voix parlée de la femme adolescente, adulte et âgée. Journal Français d’Oto-Rhino-Laryngologie, XVI1, 433–455.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cutler, A., & Butterfield, S. (1992). Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: Evidence from juncture misperception. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(2), 218–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daly, N., & Zue, V. (1992). Statistical and linguistic analyses of F  in read and spontaneous speech. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Banff, Canada, 763–766. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Looze, C. (2010). Analyse et interprétation de l’empan temporel des variations prosodiques en français et en anglais. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Provence-Aix-Marseille I.
De Looze, C., & Hirst, D. (2010). L’échelle OME (Octave-MEdiane): une échelle naturelle pour la mélodie de la parole. In Proceedings of the XXVIIIème Journées d’Etude sur la Parole, Mons, Belgium, 229–232.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Demers, M. (2000). Le registre en voix parlée : un indicateur social pour homme seulement. In Proceedings of the XXIIIèmes Journées d’Etude sur la Parole, Aussois, France, 19–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). La voix du plus fort : étude acoustique sur le registre vocal en tant qu’indicateur sociolectal et dialectal en français spontané. In M. Demers (Ed.), Registre et voix sociale (pp. 79–121). Nota Bene.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Di Cristo, A. (2016). Les musiques du français parlé : Essais sur l’accentuation, la métrique, le rythme, le phrasé prosodique et l’intonation du français contemporain. De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duez, D. (2001). Caractéristiques acoustiques et phonétiques des pauses remplies dans la conversation en français. Travaux Interdisciplinaires du Laboratoire Parole et Langage d’Aix-en-Provence (TIPA) 201, 31–48.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fodor, J. D. (2002). Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading. North East Linguistics Society, 32(1), 113–132.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gfroerer, S., & Wagner, I. (1994). Fundamental frequency in forensic speech samples. In A. Braun & J.-P. Köster (Eds.), Studies in forensic phonetics (pp. 41–48). WVT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1968). Psycholinguistics. Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, M., & Ladefoged, P. (2001). Phonation types: a cross-linguistic overview. Journal of phonetics, 29(4), 383–406. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Graham, C. (2013). Revisiting f  range production in Japanese-English simultaneous bilinguals. Annual Report of UC Berkeley Phonology Lab, 110–125. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gregersen, T., MacIntyre, P. D., & Meza, M. D. (2014). The motion of emotion: Idiodynamic case studies of learners’ foreign language anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 981, 574–588. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guaitella, I. (1990). Propositions pour une méthode d’analyse de l’intonation en parole spontanée. Journal de Physique Colloques, 511, C2-515-518. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding cultural differences: Germans, French and Americans. Intercultural press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamers, J. F., & Blanc, M. (2000). Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hart, J. T., Collier, R., & Cohen, A. (1990). A perceptual study of intonation: an experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henton, C. G. (1989). Fact and fiction in the description of female and male pitch. Language & Communication, 91, 299–311. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirst, D., & Di Cristo, A. (Eds.). (1998). Intonation systems: A survey of twenty languages. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hollien, H., & Ship, T. (1972). Speaking fundamental frequency and chronological age in males. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 151, 155–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johns-Lewis, C. (1986). Intonation in discourse. College Hill Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keating, P., & Kuo, G. (2012). Comparison of speaking fundamental frequency in English and Mandarin. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 132(2), 1050–1060. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koch, P., & Oesterreicher, W. (2001). Langage parlé et langage écrit. In G. L. Holtus, M. Metzeltin, & C. Schmitt (Eds.). Lexikon der Romanistischen Linguistik, I/21 (pp. 584–627). Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladd, R. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laver, J. (1994). Principles of phonetics. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenth, R., & Lenth, M. R. (2018). Package ‘lsmeans’. The American Statistician, 34(4), 216–221.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Léon, P. R., & Martin, P. (1970). Prolégomènes à l’étude des structures intonatives. Marcel Didier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, B., & Sidtis, D. V. L. (2017). The bilingual voice: Vocal characteristics when speaking two languages across speech tasks. Speech, Language and Hearing, 20(3), 174–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Majewski, W., Hollien, H., & Zalewski, J. (1972). Speaking fundamental frequency of Polish adult males. Phonetica, 25(2), 119–125. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ménard, L. (2003). Le registre en tant que marqueur prosodique de dialectalité : le cas du français du Québec et de la France. In M. Demers (Ed.), Registre et voix sociale (pp. 35–58). Nota Bene.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mennen, I., Schaeffler, F., & Docherty, G. (2007). Pitching it differently: A comparison of the pitch ranges of German and English speakers. In Proceedings. of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Saarbrücken, Germany, 1769–1772.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Cross-language differences in fundamental frequency range: A comparison of English and German. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(3), 2249–2260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nevo, L., Nevo, C., & Oliveira, G. (2015). A comparison of vocal parameters in adult bilingual Hebrew-English speakers. In CoDAS, 271, Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia, 483–491. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nolan, F. (2003). Intonational equivalence: An experimental evaluation of pitch scales. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona, Spain, 391, 771–774.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ordin, M., & Mennen, I. (2015). Comparison of fundamental frequency in Welsh and English in bilingual speech. In Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Glasgow, UK, 1–5.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Passoni, E., de Leeuw, E., & Levon, E. (2019). Two languages, two pitch ranges: The case of Japanese-English sequential bilinguals. In Proceedings of the 19th International Congress on Phonetic Sciences, Melbourne, Australia, 1650–1654.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pépiot, E. (2014). Male and female speech: a study of mean f , f  range, phonation type and speech rate in Parisian French and American English speakers. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 71, Dublin, Ireland, 305–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pike, K. L. (1945). The intonation of American English. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
RStudio Team (2020). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. URL [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Révis, J. (2013). La voix et soi : Ce que notre voix dit de nous. De Boeck Superieur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rietveld, T., & Vermillion, P. (2003). Cues for perceived pitch register. Phonetica, 60(4), 261–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roach, K. D., Cornett-Devito, M. M., & Devito, R. (2005). A cross-cultural comparison of instructor communication in American and French classrooms. Communication Quarterly, 53(1), 87–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rousseau, M. C. (2013). Changement de langue, changement de voix ? Une étude comparative de l’effet du statut des langues anglaise et française au Québec sur la prosodie de la voix de locuteurs bilingues. Master’s thesis, Université du Québec à Montréal.
Scharff-Rethfeldt, W., Miller, N., & Mennen, I. (2008). Unterschiede in der mittleren Sprechtonhöhe bei Deutsch/Englisch bilingualen Sprechern [Speaking fundamental frequency differences in German-English bilinguals]. Sprache Stimme Gehör, 321, 123–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (1974). Voice quality analysis of American and German speakers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 3(3), 281–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R., & Oshinsky, J. S. (1977). Cue utilization in emotion attribution from auditory stimuli. Motivation and Emotion, 41, 331–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwab, S., & Goldman, J. P. (2016). Do speakers show different F  when they speak in different languages? The case of English, French and German. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Speech Prosody, Boston, USA, 6–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sellers, V. (2000). Anxiety and reading comprehension in Spanish as a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals, 33(5), 512–521. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simon, A. C., Auchlin, A., Avanzi, M., & Goldman, J. P. (2010). Les phonostyles : une description prosodique des styles de parole en français. In M. Abecassis, & G. Ledegen (Eds.), Les voix des Français : en parlant, en écrivant (pp.71–88). Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shriberg, E. (2001). To ‘errrr’ is human: ecology and acoustics of speech disfluencies. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 31(1), 153–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Titze, I. R. (1989). Physiology and acoustic differences between male and female voices. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 85(4), 1699–1707. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Rossum, G., & Drake Jr, F.L. (1995). Python reference manual. Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Voigt, R., Jurafsky, D., & Sumner, M. (2016). Between- and within-speaker effects of bilingualism on F  variation. In Interspeech, San Francisco, USA, 1122–1126.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wenk, B. J. (1983). Effets de rythme dans le français parlé. Recherches sur le français parlé, Vol. 5, Publications de l’Université de Provence, 147–162.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, R. (1997). Back channelling, repair, pausing, and private speech. Applied Linguistics, 18(3), 314–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC Journal, 371, 308–328. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, Y. (2013). ProsodyPro – A tool for large-scale systematic prosody analysis. In Proceedings of Tools and Resources for the Analysis of Speech Prosody (TRASP’2013), Aix en Provence, France. 7–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xue, A., Hagstrom, F., & Hao, J. (2002). Speaking F  characteristics of young and elderly bilingual Chinese-English speakers: A functional system approach. Asian Pacific Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing, 71, 55–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yamazawa, H., & Hollien, H. (1992). Speaking fundamental frequency patterns of Japanese women. Phonetica, 491, 128–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoon, S., Mok, S., Youn, J., Han, J., & Yim, D. (2019). Changes in fundamental frequency depending on language, context, and language proficiency for bilinguals. Phonetics and Speech Sciences, 11(1), 9–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zimmerer, F., Jügler, J., Andreeva, B., Möbius, B., & Trouvain, J. (2014). Too cautious to vary more? A comparison of pitch variation in native and non-native productions of French and German speakers. In Proceedings of the 7th Speech Prosody Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 1037–1041. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zraick, R. I., Gentry, M. A., Smith-Olinde, L., & Gregg, B. A. (2006). The effect of speaking context on elicitation of habitual pitch. Journal of Voice 20(4), 545–554. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue