Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”

Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”

Gussenhoven and Rietveld [Journal of Phonetics (1988) 16, 355–369] presented evidence from production and perception experiments on the issue of peak-by-peak lowering versus time-dependent topline declination. They interpret the evidence in terms of a time-dependent model, with final lowering of the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of phonetics 1989-10, Vol.17 (4), p.357-364
1. Verfasser: Terken, J.M.B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 364
container_issue 4
container_start_page 357
container_title Journal of phonetics
container_volume 17
creator Terken, J.M.B.
description Gussenhoven and Rietveld [Journal of Phonetics (1988) 16, 355–369] presented evidence from production and perception experiments on the issue of peak-by-peak lowering versus time-dependent topline declination. They interpret the evidence in terms of a time-dependent model, with final lowering of the last peak. The present reaction criticizes the setup and computations on which the main conclusions are based, and concludes that the issue of peak-by-peak lowering vs. time dependency is still open, and that the data do not justify the inclusion of final lowering into the phonological description of Dutch intonation.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30451-6
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1300100349</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0095447019304516</els_id><sourcerecordid>1300100349</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2296-5b9a28b05a7a1ecd65c1ea8d97fe40a75ac7391c51dc21b670417671919e5fee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkNtKAzEQhoMoWA-PIAS80Yutme5m03gjUo-gCB6uQ5rMupGarUm2UPDCB9GX80nctuKtV8MM___PzEfIHrA-MCiPHhiTPCsKwQ5AHuas4JCVa6QHi_GQi3Kd9P4km2QrxhfW9QWDHnm_R22SazxNDR316WUbI_q6maGn2lt62l9Mb_v03mGa4cQe0--Pz4vWW_2KPukJrQK-tejNnFo0E-f1Ms15etYmUx_ThDE5_0xTHRBpPZ82qcaI8fvja4dsVHoScfe3bpOni_PH0VV2c3d5PTq9ycxgIMuMj6UeDMeMa6EBjS25AdRDK0WFBdOCayNyCYaDNQMYl4IVIEoBEiTyCjHfJvur3GloultjUi9NG3y3UkHOGDCWF7JT8ZXKhCbGgJWaBveqw1wBUwvQaglaLSgqkGoJWpWd72Tlw-6FmcOgonEdELQuoEnKNu6fhB_5M4al</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1300100349</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Terken, J.M.B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Terken, J.M.B.</creatorcontrib><description>Gussenhoven and Rietveld [Journal of Phonetics (1988) 16, 355–369] presented evidence from production and perception experiments on the issue of peak-by-peak lowering versus time-dependent topline declination. They interpret the evidence in terms of a time-dependent model, with final lowering of the last peak. The present reaction criticizes the setup and computations on which the main conclusions are based, and concludes that the issue of peak-by-peak lowering vs. time dependency is still open, and that the data do not justify the inclusion of final lowering into the phonological description of Dutch intonation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0095-4470</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30451-6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><ispartof>Journal of phonetics, 1989-10, Vol.17 (4), p.357-364</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2296-5b9a28b05a7a1ecd65c1ea8d97fe40a75ac7391c51dc21b670417671919e5fee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2296-5b9a28b05a7a1ecd65c1ea8d97fe40a75ac7391c51dc21b670417671919e5fee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30451-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27874,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Terken, J.M.B.</creatorcontrib><title>Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”</title><title>Journal of phonetics</title><description>Gussenhoven and Rietveld [Journal of Phonetics (1988) 16, 355–369] presented evidence from production and perception experiments on the issue of peak-by-peak lowering versus time-dependent topline declination. They interpret the evidence in terms of a time-dependent model, with final lowering of the last peak. The present reaction criticizes the setup and computations on which the main conclusions are based, and concludes that the issue of peak-by-peak lowering vs. time dependency is still open, and that the data do not justify the inclusion of final lowering into the phonological description of Dutch intonation.</description><issn>0095-4470</issn><issn>1095-8576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1989</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkNtKAzEQhoMoWA-PIAS80Yutme5m03gjUo-gCB6uQ5rMupGarUm2UPDCB9GX80nctuKtV8MM___PzEfIHrA-MCiPHhiTPCsKwQ5AHuas4JCVa6QHi_GQi3Kd9P4km2QrxhfW9QWDHnm_R22SazxNDR316WUbI_q6maGn2lt62l9Mb_v03mGa4cQe0--Pz4vWW_2KPukJrQK-tejNnFo0E-f1Ms15etYmUx_ThDE5_0xTHRBpPZ82qcaI8fvja4dsVHoScfe3bpOni_PH0VV2c3d5PTq9ycxgIMuMj6UeDMeMa6EBjS25AdRDK0WFBdOCayNyCYaDNQMYl4IVIEoBEiTyCjHfJvur3GloultjUi9NG3y3UkHOGDCWF7JT8ZXKhCbGgJWaBveqw1wBUwvQaglaLSgqkGoJWpWd72Tlw-6FmcOgonEdELQuoEnKNu6fhB_5M4al</recordid><startdate>198910</startdate><enddate>198910</enddate><creator>Terken, J.M.B.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Seminar Press</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HFIND</scope><scope>HOKLE</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198910</creationdate><title>Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”</title><author>Terken, J.M.B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2296-5b9a28b05a7a1ecd65c1ea8d97fe40a75ac7391c51dc21b670417671919e5fee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1989</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Terken, J.M.B.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 16</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 22</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><jtitle>Journal of phonetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Terken, J.M.B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”</atitle><jtitle>Journal of phonetics</jtitle><date>1989-10</date><risdate>1989</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>357</spage><epage>364</epage><pages>357-364</pages><issn>0095-4470</issn><eissn>1095-8576</eissn><abstract>Gussenhoven and Rietveld [Journal of Phonetics (1988) 16, 355–369] presented evidence from production and perception experiments on the issue of peak-by-peak lowering versus time-dependent topline declination. They interpret the evidence in terms of a time-dependent model, with final lowering of the last peak. The present reaction criticizes the setup and computations on which the main conclusions are based, and concludes that the issue of peak-by-peak lowering vs. time dependency is still open, and that the data do not justify the inclusion of final lowering into the phonological description of Dutch intonation.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30451-6</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0095-4470
ispartof Journal of phonetics, 1989-10, Vol.17 (4), p.357-364
issn 0095-4470
1095-8576
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1300100349
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; Periodicals Index Online; Alma/SFX Local Collection
title Reaction to C. Gussenhoven and A. C. M. Rietveld: “Fundamental frequency declination in Dutch: testing three hypotheses”
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T04%3A36%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reaction%20to%20C.%20Gussenhoven%20and%20A.%20C.%20M.%20Rietveld:%20%E2%80%9CFundamental%20frequency%20declination%20in%20Dutch:%20testing%20three%20hypotheses%E2%80%9D&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20phonetics&rft.au=Terken,%20J.M.B.&rft.date=1989-10&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=357&rft.epage=364&rft.pages=357-364&rft.issn=0095-4470&rft.eissn=1095-8576&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0095-4470(19)30451-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1300100349%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1300100349&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0095447019304516&rfr_iscdi=true