Relative clauses in Spanish: some suprasegmental characteristics

Journal of Phonetics (1983) 11 , 85-99

Relative clauses in Spanish: some suprasegmental characteristics Luisa Garro City University of New York, Graduate School, 33 W. 42nd St. , New York, New York 10036, U.S.A.

and Frank Parker * Louisiana State University, Interdepartmental Linguistics Program, Allen Hall, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803, U.S.A . Received 23rd September 1982

Abstract:

In Garro & Parker (1982), we investigated the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in English. The present study is (a) an extension of the same investigative procedure to Spanish, and (b) a comparison of the Spanish data with that already obtained for English . As before, we varied clause type (restrictive/non-restrictive), word order within the clause (SVO/OSV) , and relative pronouns to determine if predictable characteristics of relative clauses are a function of the different syntactic configurations of the two clause types. Two speakers of River Plate Spanish produced the sentence : Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos and all grammatical permutations of the embedded clause, in three conditions (136 tokens). From spectrograms of each token, we made three measurements: f0 fluctuation and vowel length in the head NP of the clause and in the last word in the clause, and the pause length preceding and following the clause. A comparison of the results with those obtained for English suggest four conclusions : ( 1) relative clauses in both languages exhibit systematic suprasegmental characteristics which can be described in terms of vowel length, pause length, and f0 contours ; (2) the major factor affecting these intonational characteristics is clause type; (3) a secondary factor is word order; ( 4) suprasegmental variations are determined by syntactic structure, not by superficial, lexical variables.

Introduction In a previous paper (Garro & Parker , 1982), we presented the results of a production experiment which support earlier intuitively-based claims that restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in English (henceforth RRC and NRRC , respectively) each exhibit systematic suprasegmental characteristics which can be described in terms of pause length, vowel length,

*To whom correspondence should be sent. 0095-44 70/83 /01 0085+ 15$03.00/0

© 1983 Academic Press Inc. (London) Ltd.

86

L . Garro and F. Parker

and variations in f0 . 1 In particular, we found (a) that NRRCs are accompanied by longer pauses preceding and following the clause than are RRCs; (b) that NRRCs are characterized by longer vowels in the NP dominating the clause and the last word in the clause than are RRCs; and (c) that NRRCs exhibit a rising f0 in pre-clause and clause-final positions, whereas RRCs have a falling f0 in both locations. We also found that clause type (RRC/NRRC) and word order within the clause (SVO/OSV) are the major determinants of suprasegmental variation. Moreover , these variations appear to be determined by the different syntactic configurations of RRCs and NRRCs. 2 In the present study we attempt to identify the different suprasegmental characteristics of RRCs and NRRCs in Spanish. Examples of both clause types are given below (1a) RRC :

(lb) NRRC:

Los gigol6s que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. "Gigolos who prefer blondes are fickle." (Some gigolos prefer blondes; only those gigolos are fickle.) Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. "Gigolos, who prefer blondes, are fickle." (All gigolos prefer bondes ; all gigolos are fickle.)

We will then compare these results with those already obtained for English. A number of investigators have commented on the suprasegmental differences between RRCs and NRRCs in Spanish. As early as 1898, Bello & Cuervo (1970, p. 128) mention in passing that the non-restrictive ("explicativo") reading of a relative clause is distinguished from the restrictive ("especificativo ") reading by the use of juncture in speech. They add that without the pause the meaning of the relative clause is clearly restrictive. 1 In Garro & Parker (1982), we used the term "pitch" to describe variations in f 0 . This usage, however, may be misleading, since "pitch" refers to the perception of f 0 rather than the physical characteristics of the signal itself. Since we were (and are) interested in measuring the latter , we will use the term "f0 " here and throughout . 2 The syntactic representations of RRCs and NRRCs are the object of some disagreement. Different syntacticians have proposed that RRCs are directly dominated by either NP , Det, or Nom and that NRRCs are either directly dominated by S or are derived from two sentences conjoined by and (see, for example, Huddleston, 1976, p. 106). However, even though no one has been able to argue conclusively for a particular analysis, everyone seems to agree that the two clause types have different syntactic representations. Several arguments for such a difference are the following facts . (1) NRRCs cannot be introduced by the RP that, whereas RRCs can:

(a) Dan Rather interviewed the President ,

f*wlho} \ t 1at

was recovering in the

f h hospital. (NRRC) (b) Dan Rather interviewed the miner wh 0 } was recovering in the hospital. (RRC) \t at (2) A NP with a unique referent can dominate only a NRRC: (aj) The Earth, which we are standing on, revolves around the sun. (N RRC) (a;;) *The Earth which we are standing on revolves around the sun. (RRC) (bj) The earth, which we are standing on, is soggy. (NRRC) (bu) The earth which we are standing on is soggy. (RRC) (3) The two clauses are interchangeable with a NRRC, whereas those with a RRC are not: (ai) The Japanese, who live by the sea, fish for a living. (NRRC) = (a;;) The Japanese, who fish for a living, live by the sea. (NRRC) (b;) The Japanese who live by the sea fish for a living. (RRC) (bu) The Japanese who fish for a living live by the sea. (RRC)

*

Relative clauses in Spanish

87

Other commentators have mentioned the suprasegmental distinctions between RRCs and NRRCs when describing the grammatical characteristics of relative clauses in Spanish. For example, Franch & Blecua (1975 , p. 1024) state that the two types of relative clauses have "distinto grado de trabaz6n con su antecedente. Esta diferencia se traduce en la expresi6n por la presencia de una pausa o la continuidad tonal" . (Each clause type has a "different degree of association with its antecedent. This difference is expressed by the presence of a pause or the absence of a break in the intonation contour".) Although they do not state specifically which characteristics go with which clause type, it is generally taken for granted that pauses and intonational breaks are associated with NRRCs. Other researchers make more specific, though brief, comments on the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in Spanish. For example, Hadlich (1971 , p. 136) mentions that NRRCs are preceded and followed by pauses and are accompanied by variations in intonation "which, though slightly different in Spanish and English, are quite similar in the two languages". Moreover, even though he does not describe the characteristics of RRCs we can infer that they are characterized by the opposite values of the same features. That is, RRCs are not set off from the matrix sentence by pauses, and they will have the opposite f0 contours from NRRCs. Unfortunately , however , Hadlich does not specify the basis for his conclusions. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must suppose that he is relying on his intuitive knowledge of both languages. More recently, D'lntrono (1979) notes the absence of pauses accompanying RRCs and their presence with NRRCs. He adds that the antecedent in NRRCs "tiene una entonaci6n un poco ascendente" (p . 214). (The antecedent "has a slightly rising pitch".) Later on in his analysis, D'Introno mentions the need for phonological rules which would assign pauses and intonation contours to relative clauses depending on whether they are restrictive or nonrestrictive. However, he does not specify the rules that would account for this. Nonetheless, like Hadlich, D'Introno does not specify the source of his information. Since he is a native speaker of Spanish, we must assume that he is relying solely on his own intuitions about the language . Quilis & Fernandez (1979) mention some of the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses only incidentally. When specifying the linguistic function of pauses, they give as an example of "pausa significativa" the distinction between RRCs and NRRCs; they state that the presence or absence of such a pause completely changes the meaning of the utterance. (See (1) above. The RRC in (1 a) would not have such a pause, while the NRRC in (1 b) would.) Moreover, Quilis & Fernandez (1979, p. 173) trace graphically the intonation pattern of a NRRC to exemplify a type of pitch variation they term "(semi)anticadencia" (rising). The example they give is reproduced in (2). (2)

La mujer , que estaba sola en la casa, sinti6 miedo. "The woman, who was alone in the house, was afraid".

None of their claims, however, is based on instrumental evidence; they rely solely on their intuitions as native speakers of Spanish. In short, as Kvavik & Olsen (1974) point out in their survey of published works on Spanish

88

L. Garro and F. Parker

intonation, relatively little has been done in this field compared to other types of phonological studies of Spanish. Similarly, few studies of Spanish intonation have been carried out compared to those done on other languages. Since Kvavik and Olsen's survey, there has been little increase in the publication of studies on Spanish intonation. In particular, we are aware of no other works in the general field of Spanish intonation that concentrate on the suprasegmental characteristics of the two types of relative clauses, whether a subjective description or a controlled, experimental study. Thus, the purpose of the first part of our investigation is three-fold: first, to identify some of the general suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in Spanish through spectrographic analysis; second, to determine what effects variations in clause type (RRC/ NRRC), word order within the clause (SVO/OSV), and choice of relative pronoun (RP) might have on the suprasegmental features of relative clauses; and third, to determine if predictable prosodic characteristics of relative clauses are a function of their different syntactic structures. In order to investigate these questions, we followed the same general procedure as in Garro & Parker (1982). In particular, we made three types of comparisons; these are illustrated in (3). (3a)

RRCs are compared to NRRCs, e.g. Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos.

(3b)

SVO word order within the clause is compared to OSV word order, e.g. Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos.

(3c)

The RPs que, (a) quienes, (a) los cuales, and a los que are compared, e.g. Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, quienes prefieren 'rubias, son veleidosos?

Based on our fmdings for English, we would expect to find systematic differences only in the comparison of (3a) RRCs and NRRCs, and (3b) SVO and OSV word order, since these variables alone are syntactic in nature. On the other hand, we would expect to find no systematic differences determined by (3c) the choice of RP, since this variable reflects simply a superficial, lexical alternation.

3 In Spanish the occurrence of particular RPs is governed by clause type (RRC/NRRC) and word order within the clause (SVO/OSV). RRCs with SVO order can be introduced only by que; NRRCs with SVO order can be introduced by que, los cuales, and quienes; and both RRCs and NRRCs with OSV order can be introduced by que, a los cuales, a quienes, and a los que. (Obviously , que is uninflected; (a) quienes is inflected for number; and (a) los cuales and a los que are inflected for number and gender.) However, D'lntrono (1979 , p. 222) mentions that in NRRCs with SVO word order the definite article+ cual(es) is generally used when there is parenthetical material between the RP and the verb of the relative clause. For this reason, we have included the phrase como todo el mundo sabe "as everyone knows" in sentence type (4) (see Table I).

Relative clauses in Spanish

89

Method Subjects Two native speakers of River Plate Spanish produced sentences containing relative clauses. Both subjects were adult males and natives of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Materials The test items consisted of the Spanish sentence, Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos , and all possible grammatical permuations of the embedded relative clause. This yields a total of twelve senence types, which are listed in Table I. Each of the sentence types in Table I was then put into three environments: "context", "isolation", and "contrast". First, each sentence was included in a short paragraph to encourage the subjects to produce the test items as naturally as possible ("context"). Second, each sentence type was uttered alone ("isolation"). Third, minimal pairs of sentence types were produced together ("contrast"). This mode of elicitation was included to encourage the subjects to emphasize the suprasegmental differences between the members of each pair. These three environments yield a total of 46 test items, consisting of a total of 68 sentences. 4 The test items are listed in Table II. Procedure The 46 test items were recorded in two individual sessions, one with each informant. Narrowand broad-band spectrograms were made of each token. From these, three different measurements were made: (a) F0 variation in the word preceding each clause boundary; i.e. in the last word of the NP dominating the clause and in the last word within the relative clause. (b) Length of the last vowel in the word preceding each clause boundary.

Table I Sentence types: Los gigolOs que prefieren rubias son veleidosos and all grammatical permutations of the relative clause ( 1) (2) (3) ( 4)

(5) (6) (7) ( 8) (9) (1 0) (II)

( 12)

Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, quienes prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, los cuales, como todo el mundo sa be, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. Los gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. Los gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. Los gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. Los gigolos, que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, a q uienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. Los gigolos, a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos.

4 Since the "context" and "isolation" conditions consisted of 12·sentences each and the "contrast" condition consisted of 22 minimal pairs of sentences, the total number of test items was 46 (12 + 12 + 22), and the total number of sentences comprising the test items was 68 (12 + 12 + (22 X 2)). For a discussion of minimal pairs, as used here, see Garro & Parker (1982, p. 153, footnote 8).

90

L. Garro and F. Parker Table II Test items: sentence types from Table I in tluee conditions "context", "isolation", and "contrast"

Context (Ellipsis indicates that an item has the same context as that preceding it.) (1) Algunos oportunistas son atra!dos por m ujeres que tienen un color de pelo determinado. Por ejemplo, los gigolos que prefieren morochas son fieles ; por otra parte, Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. (2) Todos los oportunistas tienen algun defecto. Por ejemplo, los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (3) ... los gigolos, quienes prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. ( 4) ... los gigolos, los cuales, como todo el mundo sa be, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (5) Las mujeres pueden ser clasificadas de acuerdo al color del pelo y a las caracteristicas que ellas admiran en los hombres. Por ejemplo, los gigolos que las morochas prefieren son fieles; los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (6) ... los gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (7) ... los gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (8) .. . los gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (9) Todos los gigolos tienen una caracter!stica peculiar que parece a traer a algunas mujeres. Por ejemplo, los gigolos, que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. ( 1O) . .. los gigolos, a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. ( 11) ... los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. ( 12) ... los gigolos, a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. Isolation ( 13) Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. (14) Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. ( 15) Los gigolos , quienes prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (16) Los gigolos, los cuales, como todo el mundo sabe, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (17) Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. ( 18) Los gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleid osos. (19) Los gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (20) Los gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (21) Los gigolos, que las rubias prefieren , son veleidosos. (22) Los gigolos, a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. (23) Los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. (24) Los gigolos, a low cuales las rubias prefieren , son veleidosos. Contrast (2 Sa) Los gigolos que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. (25b) Los gigolos , que prefieren rubias , son veleidosos. (26a) Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (26b) Los gigolos, que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. (27a) Los gigolos, quienes prefieren rubias , son veleidosos. (27b) Los gigolos, que prefieren rubias , son veleidosos. (28a) Los gigolos , los cuales, como todo el mundo sabe, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (28b) Los gigolos , que prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (29a) Los gigolos , los cuales, como todo el mundo sabe, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (29b) Los gigolos, quienes prefieren rubias, son veleidosos. (30a) Los gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (30b) Los gigolos , a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. (31 a) Los gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (31 b) Los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. (3 2a) Los gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (3 2b) Los gigolos , a los cuales las rubias prefieren , son veleidosos. (33a) Los gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (3 3b) Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (34a) Los gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. (3 4b) Los gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos.

Relative clauses in Spanish

91

Table II (Continued)

(3 Sa) Los (35b) Los (36a) Los (36b) Los (3 7 a) Los (3 7b) Los (38a) Los (3 8b) Los (39a) Los (39b) Los (40a) Los (40b) Los ( 41 a) Los ( 41 b) Los (42a) Los (42b) Los ( 43a) Los (43b) Los ( 44a) Los (44b) Los ( 45a) Los (45b) Los (46a) Los (46b) Los

gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a quienes las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a los que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos a los cuales las rubias prefieren son veleidosos. gigolos , a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos , que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos , que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a los que las rubias preferien, son veleidosos. gigolos, a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos , a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, a quienes las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, quienes prefieren rubias , son veleidosos. gigolos, a los cuales las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. gigolos, los cuales , como todo el mundo sabe, prefieren rubias, son veleidosos.

(c) Length of the pause preceding and following the relative clause. Fluctuations in f 0 were measured in the narrow-band spectrograms, whereas vowel and pause lengths were measured in the broad-band spectrograms. Sample spectrograms of Los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefzeren, son veleidosos, are given in Fig. 1. F 0 variations were determined by measuring the difference in f 0 between adjacent segments in the last two syllables of the words of interest, e.g. [j'iyolos]. This determined whether the f 0 was falling, rising, or a combination of the two. 5 The three measurement points - initial (I), medial (M) , and final (F) -which were used to calculate changes in f 0 are indicated on the narrow-band spectrogram in Fig. 1. Vowel lengths (Vr, V2 ) and pause lengths (P 1, P 2 ) were measured as indicated by the vertical lines in the broad-band spectrogram in Fig. 1. (For details concerning procedure, equipment, and measurements, see Garro and Parker (1982 pp. 153-55.) Results

Vowel and pause length Both vowel and pause lengths are longer for NRRCs than for RRCs. However, the word order within the clause and the choice of RP did not appear to have any effect on length. The average vowel and pause lengths for RRCs and NRRCs across the three conditions of 5 When the value for f 0 was sustained across two measurement points, we treated it as rising or falling , depending on the value of the third measurement point. For example, an f0 contour of "sustained-falling" C>) was considered "falling"(\).

\0

N

______ ',., ,..,

; ..;.,

~ -~

""'·

"~~

~--

Figure 1

'·~ ~·-~, ~ ~ ~~h

,·.·

(

\..

'

--- --

-

-=----~l~ ' '~ c

~ - ~~

~. ~

s~

'

~· = -~.~ ~ ~ "'r.""~ \·\il @ ...... ___ r~-~---------·---- - .-·-

M

"' ---_

! __ r --r--~r; ( -~ "r·-----:--~-* ,

-~

M

F

Narrow- (top} and broad-band (bottom) spectrograms of Los gigolos, a los que las rubias prefieren, son veleidosos. Three measurement points for f 0 fluctuations -initial (1) , medial (M), and fmal (F) - are indicated on the narrow-band spectrogram. Measurement points for vowels (V., V 2 } and pauses (P., P 2 ) are indicated on the broad-band spectrogram.

rc;J

~ §

l:l.. ~

~

~

93

R elative clauses in Spanish Table Ill Average vowel and pause lengths (in ms) for RRCs and NRRCs within each condition and across conditions Condition

Clause type

VI

V2

PI

p2

Context Context Isolation Isolation Contrast Contrast

RRC NRRC RRC NRRC RRC NRRC RRC NRRC

112 162 122 178 126 180 120 173

93 128 94 134 90 133

35 254 39 220 56 207 43 227

46 249 71 227 46 188 54 221

All All

92

132

elicitation are given in Table III. The figures in Table III indicate that vowel lengths in NRRCs are approximately one and a half times as long as those in RRCs, and pause lengths in NRRCs are about five times as long as those in RRCs. F 0 contours The f 0 contours for each token have been extracted and they, along with their frequency of occurrence, are displayed in Table IV for each sentence type . For example, of the six tokens of sentence type (1 ), five had a rising f 0 contour in pre-clause position and a falling contour in clause-final position. 6

Findings First, as expected, RRCs and NRRCs exhibit systematic differences in their suprasegmental characteristics. RRCs have a rising f0 contour in pre-clause position and a falling contour in clause-final position , while NRRCs exhibit just the opposite contours: falling in pre-clause position and rising in clause-final position. Moreover, RRCs are preceded and followed by little or no pause, whereas NRRCs are accompanied by clearly longer pauses. In addition, NRRCs exhibit relatively longer vowels in both the antecedent of the relative clause and the last word in the clause. These general observations are presented schematically in Fig. 2. These suprasegmental differences between RRCs and NRRCs seem to be a direct function of the differences in their syntactic structure.

Contours

Figure 2

Sentence type

Clause type

Pre-clause

1' 5, 6, 7,8 2, 9, 10 11 , 12

RRC

t

:\

NRRC

:\

v

Clause-final

Pause

+

Vowel Lengthening

+

RRC vs NRRC.

6 A dotted line indicates that only some of the tokens exhibited the part of the intonation pattern in question. For example, an f 0 contour of;\ indicates that some of the tokens had 1\ and others had \,.

\0

+>Table IV

F 0 contours for each sentence type and frequency of occurrence

Contour type Sentence type l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Test items l , 13 , 25a 2 , 14 , 25b, 27b, 28b 3, 15 , 27a, 29b,45b 4 , 16, 28a, 29a , 46b 5, 17 , 26a, 33b,34b,35b 6, 18, 30a, 33a,36a, 37a 7, 19 , 31 a, 35a, 36b,38a 8, 20, 32a, 34a, 37b,38b 9, 21, 26b, 39b , 40b , 41b 10, 22,30b, 39a,42a,43a 45a 11,23,31b, 40a, 42b,44a 12 , 24 , 32b, 41a, 43b , 44b,46a

Clause type

RP

RRC NRRC

que que

NRRC

quienes

NRRC

los cuales que

RRC RRC RRC RRC NRRC

a quienes a los que a los cuales que

NRRC

a quienes

NRRC

a los que a los cuales

NRRC

Word order

svo svo svo svo osv osv osv osv osv osv osv osc

Pre-clause

Frequency

Clause-final

Frequency

t

516 9/10

/\

1\

\1

516 8110

1\

6110

/\

7110

"

10/10

\1

9/10

t

8/12

'l,

8112

t

11/12

'l,

10112

t

12112

'l,

11 I 12

t

12112

'l,

7112

/\

9/12

v

8/12

/\

7112

v

11112

/\

6112

\1

12112

/\

8/12

v

8112

t"-<

.,~ ~., ;:s >:l..

~

~ ..., ~ ...,

95

Relative clauses in Spanish Contours Sentence type

Clause type

1 5 2 9 3 10

RRC RRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC

4

NRRC

12

NRRC

Figure 3

RP que que que que quienes a quienes los cuales a los cuales

SVQ

VS

Word order

Pre-clause

Clause-final

t t

/\

svo osv svo osv svo osv svo osv

\,

v

A

v v v v v

/". t\

/". /";,

/\

QSV.

Second, somewhat unexpectedly , word order within the relative clause appears to play no major role in effecting a change in intonation. It seems that the f 0 contour associated with the restrictive or non-restrictive nature of the clause takes precedence over any potential change which might be associated with word order within the clause. The relevant data are summarized schematically in Fig. 3. This finding was somewhat surprising since we found that word order within the clause has a limited effect on f0 contours in English. However , we will discuss this point in greater detail later. Third, as we expected , no differences were noted between clauses differing only in the choice of RP. That is, both NRRCs and RRCs exhibit their own characteristic f 0 contours regardless of the choice of RP. This is illustrated schematically in Fig. 4 . These data indicate that lexical variables such as choice of RP have no systematic effect on the intonation of relative clauses in Spanish. Contours Sentence type 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 9 10 11 12

Figure 4

Clause type RRC RRC RRC RRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC

RP que a quien es a los que a los cuales que quienes los cuales que a quienes a los que a los cuales

Word order

osv 7 osv osv osv svo svo svo osv osv osv osv

Pre-clause

Clause-final

t t t t

\, \, \, \,

/\, /\, /";,

v v

/\ ·',.,., "" /~

v v v v v

RP variation. 7 RRCs with SVO order have been excluded from this comparison since they can be introduced only by one RP : que (see footnote 3).

96

L. Garro and F. Parker

English vs Spanish It is worthwhile to compare the findings of this study with those of our earlier investigation of English. We will not go into the general intonational differences between the two languages, since basic studies are already available (see Cardenas, 1960; Shea, 1970). Instead, we will restrict our discussion to those dimensions for which we have quantitative data from both English and Spanish: vowel length, pause length, and f0 variation. The general similarities and differences are presented schematically in Fig. 5. The details are discussed below. Contours

Figure 5

Language

Clause type

English Spanish English Spanisn

RRC RRC NRRC NRRC

Pre-clause

Clause-final

/\

/\ /\ ',J

t

v

Pause

+ +

+ +

v

/\

Vowel Lengthening

English vs Spanish.

Vowel and pause length Relative vowel and pause lengths are essentially the same for both English and Spanish: vowels and pauses are longer for NRRCs than for RRCs. The average vowel and pause lengths for each language are given in Table V. For both languages, the relevant vowels in NRRCs are approximately one and a half times as long as their counterparts in RRCs. On the other hand, the pauses accompanying NRRCs in English are about ten times as long as those associated with RRCs, whereas those pauses accompanying NRRCs in Spanish are only about five times as long as the ones associated with RRCs. This, however, appears to be only an insignificant difference . The major inference to be drawn from the data in Table Vis that relative vowel and pause lengths in both pre- and post-clause positions are invariant indicators of clause type (RRC/NRRC) in both languages. It is w·o rth emphasizing that what seems to be significant here is the relative length of vowels and pauses, not absolute length. Note, for example, although the average relative length of V1 is greater before NRRCs than RRCs for both languages, the average absolute length of V1 before RRCs in English is identical to that before NRRCs in Spanish. Average vowel and pause lengths (in ms) for RRCs and NRRCs in TableV English and Spanish

Language

Clause type

V1

V2

pl

p2

English English Spanish Spanish

RRC NRRC RRC NRRC

173 263 120 173

203 285

1 71 43 227

19 131 54 221

92

132

F 0 contours While relative vowel and pause lengths are quite similar in English and Spanish, the f 0 contours exhibit both similarities and differences. In particular, variations in f 0 accompanying both RRCs and NRRCs are identical for English and Spanish in clause-final position, but they are mirror images of each other in pre-clause position. The f 0 contours for both clause

97

Relative clauses in Spanish Table VI

F 0 contours for English and Spanish, and frequency of occurrence Contour type

Language

Clause type

English English Spanish Spanish English English Spanish Spanish

RRC RRC RRC RRC NRRC NRRC NRRC NRRC

Word order

svo

OSV 8

svo osv svo osv svo osv

Pre-clause

Frequency

Clause-final

Frequency

/\

12/16 24/28 5/6 43/48 8/8 7/8 13/20 30/48

/\

15/16 15/28 5/6 36/48 7/8 5/8 19/20 39/48

/"< t t

\1

v

A /\

/\ ;\ \

\1 ',.f

v v

types in English and Spanish, along with their frequency of occurrence, are given in Table VI. In clause-fmal position, both languages exhibit a falling f 0 contour for RRCs and a rising contour for NRRCs. In pre-clause position, however, English is characterized by a falling contour preceding RRCs and a rising contour preceding NRRCs; Spanish, on the other hand, is characterized by a rising f 0 contour preceding RRCs and a falling contour before NRRCs. Another way of looking at this difference is to say that English essentially has the same f 0 contours in pre-clause and clause-final positions for both RRCs and NRRCs, while Spanish has the opposite contours in both locations for both clause types. Specifically, English exhibits falling (pre-clause )/falling (clause-final) contours accompanying RRCs and rising (pre-clause)/rising (clause-final) contours with NRRCs. Spanish, on the other hand, is characterized by rising (pre-clause)/falling (clause-fmal) contours accompanying RRCs and falling (pre-clause )/rising (clause-final) contours with NRRCs. However, no matter how these differences between English and Spanish are viewed, they are probably only superficial; what appears to be important is the fact that, in both languages, the f 0 contours accompanying RRCs have characteristics that are the opposite of those associated with NRRCs. In other words, all that a language seems to require is that the f 0 contours accompanying RRCs be sufficiently different from those associated with NRRCs so that the f 0 variations, along with vowel and pause lengths, may potentially function as cues to syntactic structure.

Effect of word order on F 0 contours Our original hypothesis was that only differences in underlying structure, such as clause type (RRC/NRRC) and word order within the clause (SVO/OSV) would effect a change in intonation . And we have seen that this hypothesis holds for the variable of clause type in both languages. On the other hand, it does not seem to work for word order: a change in word order in English has a restricted effect on f 0 , while a similar change in Spanish has none . We feel, however, that this apparent discrepancy has a plausible explanation. First, consider English. We found that the only instances in which a change in word order ·effected a change in f 0 contours were relative clauses introduced by that; no such effect was evident in clauses introduced by who or whom (see Garro & Parker, 1982, p. 159, Figs. 3 and 4). We further noted that the RP that was the only one included in our test •we have not included the f0 contours of relative clauses introduced either by the RP that or no RP at all, because relative clauses with these characteristics (i.e. RRC, OSV, that(f{J) exhibited a change in f0 contour in clause-final position. (See Garro & Parker (1982, pp. 157-159), for discussion.)

L. Garro and F. Parker

98

items that was unmarked for syntactic function (i.e. subject/o bject). On the other hand, who and whom are marked as subject and object, respectively. Thus, the relative clauses introduced by that had no surface indicator (other than word order) which marked that for syntactic function. Compare, for example, the sentences in ( 4) and (S). (4a) (4b)

Gigolos that prefer blondes are fickle. Gigolos that blondes prefer are fickle.

(Sa) (Sb)

Gigolos who prefer blondes are fickle . Gigolos whom blondes prefer are fickle.

ln (4a-b) that is marked neither as a subject or object, while in (Sa-b) who and whom are so marked. Therefore, we revised our hypothesis to state that "word order changes cause intonational differences only if there is no other surface marker which signals a difference in syntactic structure (Garro & Parker, 1982 , p. 1S9). We reasoned that a change in f 0 accompanying a change in word order might serve as an additional cue to the function of that within the clause. Now, consider Spanish. The only RP in Spanish that is not marked for syntactic function is que . Thus, given our revised hypothesis, we would expect relative clauses introduced by que to exhibit a change in f 0 when there is a change in word order. However, no such effect is evident in our Spanish data (see Fig. 3). The explanation for this may reside in the fact that although que itself is unmarked , the Spanish relative clauses introduced by tllis RP do contrast another morpheme which disambiguates the syntactic function of que, namely , the definite article. Compare, for example, the sentences in (6). (6a) (6b)

Los gigol6s que prefieren rubias son veleidosos. Los gigol6s que las rubias prefieren son veleidosos.

In (6a), where que is a subject and rubias is an object, there is no definite article preceding the latter. On the other hand , in (6b ), where que is an object and rubias is a subject, the definite article las is appended to rubias. Thus, in relative clauses introdued by que, even though que itself is unmarked , there is another surface marker (besides word order) which may serve to signal the function of the RP. If this line of reasoning is correct, then our revised hypothesis is shown to hold not only for English but also for Spanish: a change in word order effects a change in f 0 contour only if there is no other surface marker (other than word order) which signals the syntactic function of the RP. In light of these findings, it might be worthwhile to investigate this phenomenon further not only with the RPs that and que , but also with which and who. Which, of course, is unmarked for function, and who is on its way to becoming unmarked. Note, for example , the (at least marginal) acceptability of Gigolos who blondes prefer are fickle. In this sentence, who is functioning as an object, although its form is historically that of a subject. If it turns out that a change in the f0 contour accompanies OSV word order within a clause introduced by who, this fact would support our revised hypothesis. Conclusion This study has had essentially two aims: (a) to describe the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in Spanish, and (b) to compare the results of tllis study with those we obtained earlier for English. First, relative clauses in Spanish, like those in English, exhibit systematic suprasegmental characteristics which can be described in terms of vowel length, pause length, and f 0 contours. Second , the major factor affecting these intonational

Relative clauses in Spanish

99

characteristics is clause type (RRC/NRRC). In both languages , vowel and pause lengths accompanying NRRCs are noticeably longer than those associated with RRCs. Moreover, RRCs and NRRCs in both Spanish and English exhibit characteristic f 0 contours in pre-clause and clause-final positions. Even though the details of these contours differ for the two languages, the significant point is that the contours, along with vowel and pause lengths, are unambiguous indicators of clause type. Third, a secondary factor affecting the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses is word order within the clause (SVO/OSV). The effect of this variable has a restricted surface structure manifestation in English, but none in Spanish. We have tried to argue, however, that the restricted effect of word order on f 0 contours is a function of surface ambiguity: a change in word order effects a change in f 0 only if there is no other overt surface marker (other than word order) which disambiguates the function of an unmarked RP. Finally, the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in both Spanish and English seem to be a function of their syntactic structure. That is, clause type always has a systematic effect on vowel length, pause length, and f 0 contours. Likewise , word order has a restricted effect on f 0 contours alone. On the other hand, lexical variables , such as choice of RP or presence/absence of a RP, have no effect on the suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in either language. References Bello, A. & Cuervo, R. (1970) . Gramatica de Ia lengua caste/lana. 8va. edici6n. Buenos Aires: Editorial Sapena. Cardenas, D . (1960) . Introduccion a una comparacion fonologica del espana/ y del ingles . Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics. D'lntrono , F. (1979). Sintaxis transformacional del espana/. Madrid: Ediciones Cittedra. Franch, J . & Blecua, J. (197 5). Gramatica espa~iola. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel. Garro , L. & Parker, F . (1982). Some suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in English . Journal ofPhonetics, 10, 149-161. Hadlich, R. (1971) . A Transformational Grammar of Spanish. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: PrenticeHall. Huddleston, R. (1976). An Introduction to English Transformational Syntax. London: Longman. Kvavik , K. & Olsen , C. (1974). Theories and methods in Spanish intonational studies . Phonetica, 30 , 65-100. Quilis, A. & Fernandez , J. (l979) . Curso de fonetica y fonologia espana/as. 9a . edici6n. Madrid: Consejo Superior de investigaciones Cient(ficas. Shea, J. (1970). A contrastive study of stress, juncture and intonation in English and Roman ce languages . M.A. Thesis. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Louisiana State University.