Mothers’ use of F0 after the first year of life in Peninsular Spanish and American English

Alba Arias, Eduardo García, Isaac McAlister, Covadonga Sánchez, and Meghan Armstrong

University of Massachusetts Amherst

Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2015Sunday, September 27

Mothers’ use of F0 after the first year of life in Peninsular

Spanish and American English

2Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2015

Infant Directed Speech (IDS)

§ Grammatically simple: short, simple sentences; questions and imperatives; frequent repetition.

§ Lexically simple: words of 2 or fewer syllables; diminutives; words of affection.

§ Acoustically exaggerated: higher F0 peaks, F0 range larger; pauses lengthened; final syllables lengthened; slow rate of articulation.

Fernald et al., 1989; Stern et al. 1989, Kitamura et al. 2001, among others


IDS functions

§ Engaging and maintaining attention.

§ Communicating affect and facilitating social interaction.

§ Facilitating language acquisition.

Kitamura and Burnham (2003)


Previous studies-Main findings§ We know that parents use lower mean F0 as the child gets

older, but most studies focus on first year• Stern (1983)- measurements at months 0, 4, 12, and 24;

highest mean F0 at 4 months.• McRoberts and Best (1997)- measurements at months 3, 7,

10, 15 and 17; peak at 7 months.• Kitamura and Burnham (2003)- measurements at months 3,

6, 9, and 12; peaks at 6 and 12 months.§ Ko (2012) found that changes in speech rate were

correlated to MLU (Mean Length of Utterance).§ Yu et al. (2014) report that mean F0 and F0 range increase

in tonal targets used to mark focus in English.


Previous studies-Main findings§ There are cross-linguistic differences in the extent of

prosodic modification in IDS (Fernald et al., 1989)• American English: most extreme pitch modifications

(compared to French, Italian, German, Japanese, British English)

§ Children's gender also has an effect• Australian mothers use higher mean F0 (as well as wider pitch

range) with daughters while Thai mothers do so with their sons (Kitamura et al, 2001; Kitamura and Burnham, 2003).


Previous studies: Spanish

§ Blount and Padgug (1976)• Concluded that Latin American Spanish IDS and CDS

has less exaggerated intonation than American English; no acoustic measurements.

§ Studies looking at later stages are mainly from a phonological perspective (AM framework) ontune-types found in CDS (Thorson et al. 2012;Armstrong 2012).• No info about how other phonetic cues are produced

and how might change over time.


?????

IDS ADSCDS


Present study§ This study is going to address the following gaps in the

literature:• Longitudinal (corpus) study comparing American English and

Peninsular Spanish with acoustic measurements.• Analysis of mean F0 and pitch range modifications as a

function of the child's linguistic development (MLU).• Speech directed to children aged 0;11-3;01 (IDS>CDS). • Consideration of different types of utterances.• The effect of focus in two languages that are considered to

use different strategies.


Intonational focus

ENGLISH -> prosody

§ Example: MARY reads books§ Focused constituents: wider

range/higher peaks, longer duration and higher intensity (Ladd 1996; Cruttenden 1997; Gussenhoven 2004)

SPANISH -> word order

§ Example: lee libros MARÍA§ The use of prosody is more

controversial (Zubizarreta, 1998 vs. Domínguez, 2004)

§ English and Spanish are intonational languages; however, they exploit prosody in different ways; the expression of focus (introduction of new information) is one of them.

§ Following Yu (2014), differences should be expected as well in CDS.

§ García Lecumberri (1996) points to the use of wider pitch range in focal accents in British English compared to Northern-Peninsular Spanish.


Research questions & Hypotheses§ RQ1: Are there cross-linguistic differences in the use of mean F0

and pitch range after the first year of life?• H1: English speaking mothers will have a higher mean F0

and wider range than Spanish speaking mothers (Fernald, 1989).

§ RQ2: How can we characterize the IDS à CDS shift in terms of pitch range/mean F0?

• H2: The pitch range and the mean F0 will decrease as the children become more linguistic (as the MLU increases).

§ RQ 3: Do factors such as type of utterance and intonational focus have an effect on those prosodic features?

• H3.1: Mean F0 will be higher in questions than in declaratives or commands.

• H3.2: The range will be wider in contexts of intonationally-marked focus


Methodology: CORPUS & SUBJECTS

§ CHILDES (child language component of the TalkBank system -system for sharing and studying conversational interactions-)

§ 4 female children between 0;11 and 3;01 • Peninsular Spanish (López Ornat 1994; Llinàs-Grau 2000)

• Irene (Asturias). DOB: August 23, 1997. • María (Madrid). DOB: November, 1987

• American English (Demuth, Culberson & Alter, 2006)• Naima (Providence). DOB: March 14, 2001.• Lily (Providence). DOB: January 13, 2001.


Methodology: CORPUS & SUBJECTS

(in months)


Methodology: RECORDING PROCEDURES

§ Recorded every 2 weeks at family homes.§ Daily situations. Normal verbal interactions.§ Recording fragments.

• Irene: from 0;11-2;06 → 8 sessions• María: from 1;07-2;11 → 7 sessions• Lily: from 1;01-3;01→ 9 sessions • Naima: from 0;11-3;01 → 10 sessions


Methodology: DATA COLLECTION

§ 50 utterances per session, every 3 months (when possible):• 950 utterances in English• 739 utterances in Spanish

§ Taken from different points in the recording (Kitamura et al. 2003)

§ MLU was calculated using CLAN § Clear utterances:

• Voices not intermingled • No background noise• Pitch shown continuously• Without tracking errors


Methodology: CODING§ Acoustic measurements

• MEAN F0• calculated in Hertz (Hz)

by PRAAT• F0-MAXIMUM

• the highest f0-peak in the utterance

• F0-MINIMUM• the lowest f0-value in the

utterance• F0 RANGE

• calculated by subtracting f0-minimum from f0-maximum

§ Other measurements• TYPE OF UTTERANCE

• Declaratives• Questions: WH, Polar

(PQ), Tag (T), and Other (O)

• Imperatives• INTONATIONAL FOCUS

(Yu,2014)• Present vs. absent

Criteria:- Pitch excursions(Cruttenden, 1997, Gussenhoven, 2004) in contexts where new information or contrast isintroduced (Kiss, 2008)


Data description: type of utterance by speaker

QUESTIONS (Q)DECLARATIVES (D)IMPERATIVES (I)

• More imperativesin Spanish.

• More declarativesin English.


Data description: type of question by speaker

WH- QUESTIONS (WH)POLAR QUESTIONS (PQ)TAG QUESTIONS (T)OTHER (O)

• More WH in Spanish.

• More PQ in English.


Individual results: MEAN F0

§ Linear regression with MEAN F0 as the dependentvariable.

IRENEMEAN F0-AGE: n.s

MARIAMEAN F0-AGE: p<0.05

LILYMEAN F0-AGE: p<0.001

NAIMAMEAN F0-AGE: n.s.


Individual results: RANGE

§ Linear regression with RANGE as the dependentvariable.

IRENERANGE-AGE: n.s

MARIARANGE-AGE: p<0.01

LILYRANGE-AGE: p<0.001

NAIMARANGE-AGE: p<0.01


Results: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

§ Mixed effects linear regression models (with UTTERANCE TYPE

as random intercept, CHILD as a random effect)• Dependent variable: MEAN F0

• AGE was a significant predictor (p<0.001) but MLUis not: MEAN F0 decreases as children get older.

• TYPE of utterance and LANGUAGE were notsignificant.

• Dependent variable: RANGE• AGE was also significant (p<0.001) but MLU was

NOT a significant predictor.• LANGUAGE was also significant (p<0.05)• There were significant interactions between AGE

and FOCUS (p<0.001), and between AGE, FOCUS, andLANGUAGE (p<0.01).


Results: MEAN F0

§ Mean F0 decreases as a function of AGE in both languages(p<0.001)

§ The differencebetweenlanguages did notreach significance.

Naima0;11F0: 304,23 Hz

Naima3;01F0:253,34 Hz

María1;7 F0: 271.5 Hz

María2;11F0: 185.96 Hz


Results: RANGE

§ RANGE decreases as a function of AGE in both languages(p<0.001)

§ The differencebetween bothlanguages issignificant(p<0.05): range iswider in English


Results: RANGE & FOCUS

§ Where there is no focus, RANGE gets narrower as AGE increases in both languages(p<0.05).

§ In English, there is aneffect of AGEin bothcontexts(p<0.01)

(N) NON-FOCUSED (solid line)(Y) FOCUSED (dashed line)

Naima1;7“That’s yourBOSSY voice”María0;11“TETES tiene la nena”


Discussion

§ H1 was CONFIRMED: English-speaking mothers use a higher mean F0 (did not reach significance) and a wider pitch range (p<0.05) than Spanish-speaking mothers.

§ H2 was partially CONFIRMED: Mean F0 and pitch range decreased across time. However, age was a better predictor than MLU.

§ H3:• H3.1 NOT-CONFIRMED: Mean F0 will be higher in questions

than in declaratives or commands.• H3.2 CONFIRMED: The range was wider in contexts of

intonationally-marked focus.


Discussion

§ 25 months seems to be important, but why?• Bernstein Ratner (1987) propose than certain

modifications in CDS disappear when children are able to produce 3- to 4- word utterances


Conclusions

§ Corpus study shows that prosodic characteristics of speech continue to change after the first birthday.• These changes may depend on specific characteristics of a language’s

grammar (i.e. the use of intonational focus, for example)§ All acoustic measurements show that American English uses

more exaggerated F0 values in IDS/CDS (mean F0, pitch range) & even more with focus.

§ The changes taking place around 25 months should be further explored• MLU was not significant to predict the trend but this does not mean

other aspects of children’s linguistic development are not.• Future work should assess children’s prosodic production to better

understand what motivates changes in CDS§ Small step towards better understanding the “grey area”

between IDS and CDS


ReferencesArmstrong, M.E. (2012). The development of yes-no question intonation in Puerto Rican Spanish. Ph.D. dissertation.

Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.Blount, B.G. & Padgug, E.J. (1976). Prosodic, paralinguistic and interactional features in parentchild speech: English and

Spanish. Journal of Child Language, 4(1), 67-86.Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. B. (2015). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/Demuth, K., Culbertson, J. & Alter, J. (2006). Word-minimality, epenthesis, and coda licensing in the acquisition of English.

Language & Speech, 49, 137-174.Fernald, A., Taeschner, T., Dunn, J., Papousek, M. & de Boysson Bardies, B. (1989). A Crosslanguage study of prosodic

modifications in mothers’ and fathers’ speech to preverbal infants. Journal of Child Language, 16, 477-501.Fernald, A., & Mazzie, C. (1991). Prosody and focus in speech to infants and adults. Developmental psychology, 27(2), 209.Kitamura, C., Thanavishuth, C., Burham, D., & Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2001). Universality and specificity in infant-directed

speech: Pitch modifications as a function of infant age and sex in a tonal and non-tonal language. Infant Behavior and Development, 24(4), 372-392.

Kitamura, C., & Burnham, D. (2003). Pitch and communicative intent in mother’s speech: Adjustments for age and sex in the first year. Infancy, 4(1), 85-110.

Ko, Eun-Suk.2002. Nonlinear development of speaking rate in child-directed speech. Lingua, 122, 841-857.Llinàs-Grau, M. (2000). El desarrollo de las categorías gramaticales: Análisis contrastivo de la adquisición linguística

temprana del inglés, castellano y catalán. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.López Ornat, S. (1994). La adquisición de la lengua Española. Madrid: Siglo XXI.MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. 3rd Edition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.McRoberts, G. W., & Best, C. T. (1997). Accomodation in mean F0 during mother-infant andn father-infant vocal

interactions: a longitudinal case study. Journal of Child Language, 24(03), 719-736.Stern, D. N., Spieker, S., Barnett, R. K., & MacKain, K. (1983). The prosody of maternal speech: Infant age and context

related changes. Journal of Child language, 10(1), 1-15.Thorson, J., Borràs-Comes, J., Crespo-Sendra, V., Vanrell, M.M. & Prieto, P. (2014). The acquisition of melodic form and

meaning in yes-no interrogatives by Catalan and Spanish speaking children.


¡Gracias!Thank you!


Previous studiesLongitudinal studies● Stern et al. (1983)

○ IDS of 6 middle-class, native American English speakers, white mothers of healthy first-born infants (3 boys and 3 girls).

○ 2 to 6 days (neonatal period); 4 months (pre-linguistic); 12 months (one-word stage); 24 months.

○ Transcription and analysis of the first 100 utterances of each audiotaped sessions (roughly ½ to ⅔ of the session).

○ Features of speech analyzed: complexity (MLU), intonation (Terminal pitch change, Transitional change, Pitch range, Absolute high), timing, tempo, and repetition.

Results:○ CHANGES IN MATERNAL LANGUAGE BEHAVIOR RELATED TO INFANT AGE

■ PITCH● Mothers have the highest means of all 4 measures at infant age 4 months

(4>12>24>0).■ Mother’s MLU

● Higher complexity of utterance at infant age 24 months (24>4>12>0).○ ISD vs. ADS: IDS is shorter in MLU, shows more pitch contouring, is less rapid, conforms

to a higher tempo, and shows more repetitiveness.


Previous studies§ Fernald et al. (1989)

• Comparative study of IDS 6 language groups: French, Italian, German, Japanese, British English and American English

• 5 mothers and 5 fathers for each language group• Infants aged 10-14 months• Increased mean F0, increased F0 range (mothers, but not fathers; Japanese mothers),

greater F0 variability, shorter utterances, and longer pauses compared to ADS.• American English: most extreme pitch modifications

→ There are cross-linguistic differences in the extent of prosodic modification in IDS


Previous studies§ Kitamura (2001)

• Aim: prosodic characteristics of IDS in a tonal (Thai) and non-tonal (Australian English) language.

• Measurements: Mean F0, pitch range, and slope F0 with respect to age, sex and language.• Participants:

• 22 mother-infant dyads (12 Australian, 10 Thai)• Infants at birth, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months + ADS

• 5,280 utterances• Results

• Age-mean F0: F0 higher in speech to infants than adults and higher in Australian English than Thai.

• Age-pitch range: Australian English mothers present more expanded pitch range than Thai mothers.

• Age-slope F0: falling intonation was more prevalent in ADS than IDS, • English mothers increase rising contours from birth to 6 months, while • Thai mothers increase falling contours.

• Sex-trends analysis: • Thai: mothers present higher mean F0 with sons• English: higher mean F0 with daughters• Mothers expand pitch range when talking to female than male infants.


Previous studies§ Kitamura and Burnham (2003)

• AIM: Find differences in the acoustic realization of IDS during the first year based on the babies gender

• DATA: 12 mothers (6 female/6 males infants) at 5 ages (birth, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months) + ADS

• RATING SCALES (administered to 60 undergraduate students)• Stimulus: 72 samples (12 of ADS, 60 of IDS)-> the first utterance free of

background noise in each one of them was taken-> low-pass filtered• Scales: Positive or negative affect (1); expressing affection (2); encouraging

attention (3), comforting and soothing (4); directing behaviour (5).• RESULTS FROM THE ACOUSTIC MEASURES in correlation with the scales:

• Mothers modify their mean F0 and pitch range based on the meaning they are trying to convey• Mean F0 -> positive affect, Affection, Attention, and comfort or soothe• Pitch range -> Directive (attention and direct behavior)

• There are changes as the infant grows, which are the result of accommodating the way they speak to how the infant develops

• (1) increases; (2) increases; (3) increases; (4) decreases; (5) increases at the age of 9-months


Previous studies§ McRoberts, G. W., & Best, C. T. (1997)

• Longitudinal study (ages = 0;3, 0;7, 0;10, 1; 3 and 1;5) of an infant and his parents.

• METHOD• Spontaneous play interactions with each of

her parents separately and in isolated vocal play sessions.

• Acoustic analysis: F0 • RESULTS

• Differences in the infants’ mean f0 across ages and conditions were quite modest →range from 315 to 465 hz.

• Both the mother and father increased their mean f0 when interacting with their infant (significantly).

• The infant, however, did not alter mean f0 when interacting with her parents compared to her mean f0 when alone (not significantly).

• She didn’t change the F0 with either of them.

• CONCLUSION• She did NOT demonstrate significant

adjustment of vocal pitch in the direction of either parent.

• BUT, parents show evidence for consistent adjustment→ to suit the infant.


Previous studies§ Blount and Padgug (1976)

• Description and comparison of IDS in English and Spanish.• IDS by 5 English- and 4 Spanish-speaking parents; all 9 residents in Austin,

TX (diverse Latin American backgrounds of the Spanish-speaking families).• Children ages during data collection:

• ENGLISH: from 0;9 to 1;6• SPANISH: from 0;8 to 1;10

• Controlled intonation features of IDS: • Exaggerated intonation (unusual pitch movements in ADS)• Speech marked with unusual high pitch• Speech marked with unusual low pitch

• FINDINGS:• Exaggerated intonation and high pitch are very frequent in both

languages; but both yield a higher rate in English than in Spanish.• Low pitch, though less frequent in both languages, is also produces at a

higher rate in English.

Documents

Mothers’ use of F0 after the first year of life in Peninsular Spanish and American English