This article is published in AL-QALAM Journal of Languages and Literary Studies, Vol. 1, Issue 1, December 2025 (A Publication of the Department of English and Literature, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara State, Nigeria)
TONE AND STRESS IN MULTILINGUAL SPEECH: A
CROSS-LINGUISTIC AND PHONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
By
Khadijah Bala Muhammad
Department of Educational Foundations, College of Education, Open and
Distance Learning, Kampala International University, Kampala, Uganda
&
Ahmad Kainuwa
Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of
Education, Federal University Gusau, Zamfara state, Nigeria.
Corresponding
author's email and phone No: mhammadkhadijah616@gmail.com.
Abstract
Tone and stress are fundamental features of
spoken language that shape perception, comprehension, and communication across
diverse linguistic contexts. In many African and Asian languages, tone serves a
lexical or grammatical function, distinguishing meaning through pitch
variation, whereas in stress-dominant languages such as English, stress
organizes rhythm, highlights emphasis, and conveys information structure. In
multilingual speakers, these prosodic systems often interact in complex ways:
first-language (L1) tone or stress patterns can influence second-language (L2)
pronunciation, affecting rhythm, pitch contours, and overall intelligibility.
Drawing on recent cross-linguistic research (Gordon, 2023) and advances in
machine learning for suprasegmental analysis (de la Fuente & Jurafsky,
2024), this study examines how tone and stress interact in multilingual speech,
and investigates their impact on listener comprehension. Using an acoustic and
perceptual mixed-methods approach with speakers from both tonal and
stress-dominant backgrounds, The study identify patterns of tone preservation,
stress shifts, and prosodic interference, and explore how these patterns
mediate intelligibility outcomes. Findings indicate that intelligibility is
optimized when L2 stress aligns with listener expectations, although exposure
to diverse accents can mitigate comprehension challenges arising from L1
prosodic transfer. The study underscores the importance of treating tone and
stress as dynamically interacting systems rather than isolated features.
Implications extend to language teaching, speech technology design, and
international communication practices, emphasizing intelligibility,
inclusivity, and recognition of diverse accent patterns in multilingual
contexts.
Keywords: Tone,
stress, multilingualism, phonology, English as a lingua franca
Introduction
Tone and stress are essential suprasegmental
features that shape how speech is perceived, produced, and understood across
languages. Supra segmental extend beyond individual sounds, influencing pitch,
rhythm, intensity, and duration, and they help listeners decode meaning, focus,
and speaker intent (Ladefoged & Johnson, 2014). In tonal languages, prevalent
in many African (e.g., Yoruba, Igbo, Zulu) and Asian (e.g., Mandarin, Thai,
Vietnamese) contexts, pitch variations on syllables can completely change word
meanings. For example, in Yoruba, “ó” and “ò” differ in tone and
correspond to distinct lexical items (Yip, 2002). In contrast, stress-dominant
languages such as English or German mark prominence on certain syllables,
shaping rhythm, word duration, and intonation patterns. Stress also signals
emphasis, sentence boundaries, and pragmatic intent, all of which are vital for
intelligibility and natural-sounding speech (Gordon, 2023; Ladefoged &
Johnson, 2014).
For multilingual speakers navigating both
tonal and stress-dominant languages, these prosodic systems often interact in
complex ways. L1 suprasegmental features may transfer into L2 speech, resulting
in tone preservation, stress shifts, or prosodic interference. For instance,
tonal L1 speakers of Yoruba or Mandarin learning English may maintain pitch
contrasts in contexts where English relies on stress cues, creating rhythmic
patterns unfamiliar to native English listeners (Hao, Gong, & Zhang, 2023).
Conversely, stress-dominant L1 speakers may over- or underuse pitch in tonal L2
contexts, affecting word meaning and intelligibility. Such patterns are not
errors but reflect the dynamic interplay of prosodic systems, emphasizing the
need to examine tone and stress as interacting, rather than isolated, features
(de la Fuente & Jurafsky, 2024; Cao, Pavlik, & Bidelman, 2024).
Understanding the relationship between tone
and stress is critical for multiple domains. In language teaching, traditional
L2 pedagogy often prioritizes segmental accuracy (individual consonants and
vowels) over supra segmentals, yet learners with strong suprasegmental
mismatches may remain less intelligible despite accurate pronunciation of
individual sounds (Gordon, 2023; Their, 2023). In speech technology, such as
automatic speech recognition (ASR) and text-to-speech (TTS) systems,
suprasegmental variation presents significant challenges. Systems trained
primarily on stress-dominant L1 speech often misinterpret tonal speech,
reducing accuracy and accessibility (de la Fuente & Jurafsky, 2024; Dossou,
2023). Likewise, in international professional communication, including
business, diplomacy, and academia, the correct perception of tone and stress
influences clarity, comprehension, and pragmatic interpretation. Misaligned
prosodic patterns can cause misunderstanding or unintended pragmatic
interpretations, emphasizing the need for inclusive strategies that account for
accent and prosodic diversity.
This study
addresses three central questions:
1.
How do tone and stress systems interact in
multilingual speech?
2.
What patterns of phonological transfer,
interference, and adaptation emerge across speakers from different L1
backgrounds?
3.
How do variations in tone and stress influence
intelligibility and comprehension in multilingual contexts?
By exploring these questions, the study
foregrounds a functional, rather than prescriptive, approach to prosody. This
aligns with current trends in cross-linguistic phonology and World English
research, which highlight intelligibility, accent diversity, and L1 influence
as central to effective multilingual communication (Gordon, 2023; Cao et al.,
2024; Their, 2023). Recent research underscores the importance of integrated
prosodic analysis. Gordon (2023) shows that tone and stress dynamically
interact, with stress patterns modulating tonal perception and vice versa. De la Fuente
& Jurafsky (2024) demonstrate computationally that suprasegmental cues
significantly impact ASR accuracy, particularly for L2 speakers with tonal or
stress-dominant L1s. Hao et al. (2023) finds that tonal L1 interference affects
both perception and production in stress-dominant L2s, influencing pitch,
rhythm, and syllable duration. These findings collectively suggest that prosody
should be studied holistically rather than in isolation.
In response, the present study employs a
mixed-methods approach, combining acoustic analyses with perceptual listener
evaluations, to examine tone preservation, stress shifts, and prosodic
interference in multilingual speakers. Beyond documenting transfer patterns,
the study seeks to provide actionable insights for language pedagogy, speech
technology, and international communication. By emphasizing intelligibility and
functional communication over native-norm imitation, this research supports
inclusive strategies for multilingual education, technological development, and
global professional interaction. The study
examines how tone and stress interact in multilingual speech and affect
intelligibility. Section 2 reviews research on
L1 transfer effects and cross-linguistic prosodic patterns. Section 3
outlines the mixed-methods approach, combining acoustic analysis with
perceptual listener evaluations. Section 4 presents the results,
highlighting patterns of tone preservation, stress shifts, and prosodic
interference, and discusses their impact on comprehension. Sections 5
and 6 explore practical implications for teaching, technology,
and communication, offering recommendations that prioritize intelligibility and
inclusive communication strategies.
Literature
Review
Tone in World
Languages
In tonal
languages, common in many African (e.g., Yoruba, Igbo, Zulu) and Asian (e.g.,
Mandarin, Thai, Vietnamese) contexts, variations in pitch at the syllable level
serve a lexical-meaning–distinguishing
function. Changing the tone of a single syllable can alter the meaning
of a word entirely. Tonal systems typically comprise both level tones (high, mid, low) and contour tones (rising, falling, or
complex pitch movements). Yip (2002) highlights the phonemic significance of
tone, while Li (2024) emphasizes that tone also interacts with higher-level
prosodic structures, affecting rhythm and temporal organization. Acoustically,
tones are realized through fundamental
frequency (F0) variation, often combined with differences in duration and intensity. In multilingual speakers, these tonal characteristics
can influence—or be influenced by—stress systems in other languages, creating
complex cross-linguistic prosodic interactions.
2.2
Stress and Intonation
Stress-prominent languages, such as English
and German, rely on the relative
prominence of syllables or words to convey meaning and structure speech
rhythm. Prominent syllables are often longer,
louder, and higher in pitch than unstressed syllables, guiding listeners
in word recognition and comprehension (Ladefoged & Johnson, 2014).
Misplacement of word stress in second language speakers can significantly impair intelligibility
(Levis, 2018). Recent neuroscientific research by Zhang et al. (2023) shows
that speakers of tonal L1s process stress in English differently, revealing
cognitive differences in rhythm perception. Thus, stress and intonation are
critical in shaping rhythm, facilitating comprehension, and supporting
intelligibility in multilingual contexts.
2.3 Tone–Stress
Interactions in Multilingual Speech
When speakers of tonal languages acquire
stress-dominant L2s, or vice versa, the two prosodic systems often interact systematically. Gordon (2023)
notes that high tones frequently attract stress, possibly because the inherent
phonetic prominence of high pitch (longer duration, greater intensity) draws
attention. Empirical studies support this: Lin, Zhang, and Lin (2022) found
that Chinese tone awareness influenced English word reading and spelling in
children, while Choi et al. (2017) observed that lexical tone sensitivity
contributed to stress perception in English ESL learners. Computational
research also corroborates these patterns; de la Fuente and Jurafsky (2024)
demonstrated that language-specific training shapes how tone and stress are
internally represented in machine learning models of speech. Collectively,
these studies indicate that the interplay between tone and stress is not incidental but a systematic
feature that significantly impacts speech rhythm, intelligibility, and listener
processing in multilingual environments.
Methodology
Participants
The study
engaged a total of sixty adult multilingual speakers aged between 20 and 35
years. Participants were carefully chosen to represent a variety of prosodic
backgrounds, allowing for meaningful comparisons across linguistic systems. The
first group comprised 20 speakers of African tonal languages such as Yoruba,
Igbo, and Zulu, in which subtle pitch variations at the syllable level are
crucial for distinguishing word meaning. The second group included 20 speakers
of Asian tonal languages, namely Mandarin, Thai, and Vietnamese, which
similarly rely on tonal distinctions for lexical comprehension. The third group
consisted of 20 speakers of European stress-dominant languages such as English,
German, and Spanish, where word stress, rhythm, and syllable prominence are
more central to the prosodic system than lexical tone. All participants
reported intermediate to advanced English proficiency, which was verified
through self-assessment questionnaires and benchmark measures corresponding to
CEFR levels B2–C1. Individuals with any reported speech, hearing, or
neurological impairments were excluded to ensure that observed prosodic
differences were attributable to linguistic and cognitive factors rather than
physiological constraints.
Additionally, detailed language background
information was collected for each participant, including age of acquisition,
frequency of daily usage, and exposure to English and other languages. This
allowed the researchers to account for potential cross-linguistic influence or
transfer effects on prosody. For instance, a Yoruba speaker who began learning
English at age 6 and used it regularly in an academic setting might exhibit
different tonal adaptations compared to a peer who acquired English later and
used it primarily in social contexts.
Materials
Three complementary speech elicitation tasks
were used to capture both controlled and naturalistic prosodic patterns:
- Word
Lists –
Carefully designed word lists were constructed to elicit contrasts in tone
or stress relevant to the participants’ L1 and English. For example,
Yoruba participants were presented with minimal tone pairs such as oko (“husband”) versus okò (“farm
implement”), while English speakers encountered stress-minimal pairs
like record (noun) versus record (verb). These lists allowed
precise measurement of pitch variation and stress placement at the
syllable level.
- Sentence
Reading –
Participants read short, grammatically varied sentences in both English
and their L1. Sentences were designed to highlight L1-specific tonal or
stress characteristics within a connected speech context. For example, a
Zulu speaker might read a sentence with multiple tonal contours, revealing
how pitch patterns are preserved, modified, or flattened when speaking
English.
- Spontaneous
Narrative Speech – To capture more naturalistic prosody,
participants were asked to describe a personal experience or narrate a
picture story for 2–3 minutes. This task allowed the researchers to
observe prosodic features in authentic communicative contexts, including intonation,
stress patterns, rhythm, and phrasing.
All speech
samples were recorded in a quiet, sound-treated environment, using
high-fidelity microphones. Acoustic data were analyzed using Praat software (Boersma & Weenink,
2021), ensuring precise measurement of pitch, duration, and intensity patterns.
Procedures and
Data Analysis
Acoustic
analysis focused on
several key features: fundamental frequency (F0) contours, syllable duration,
intensity peaks, and stress placement. For tonal language speakers, changes in
F0 on individual syllables were closely examined to determine whether tone
patterns were maintained, modified, or neutralized in English speech. For
stress-dominant language speakers, syllable prominence, timing, and intensity
were analyzed relative to native English norms. Perceptual evaluation involved a panel of 10 listeners,
comprising five native English speakers and five proficient non-native
speakers. Listeners assessed intelligibility using a 5-point Likert scale and
transcribed selected utterances to provide detailed comprehension data. This
dual approach enabled the researchers to correlate acoustic measurements with
listener perception and identify prosodic features that most strongly influence
intelligibility. Statistical analysis
employed mixed-effects regression models. Here, intelligibility scores were
treated as the dependent variable, while prosodic features, including F0 range,
stress placement, syllable duration, and intensity, were entered as predictors.
Random effects accounted for individual variation among both speakers and
listeners. This robust approach allowed the study to determine which prosodic
cues significantly predicted successful comprehension across multilingual contexts,
offering both quantitative insight into tone–stress interactions and
qualitative understanding of how prosody shapes intelligibility in African
English.
Results and
Discussion
Tone
Realization
Acoustic analysis revealed that African tonal L1 speakers retained
aspects of their native tone patterns when speaking English, particularly in
high-frequency lexical items such as common nouns and verbs. In these cases,
pitch movements characteristic of the speaker’s L1 were often transferred into
English pronunciation. For example, a Yoruba speaker might maintain a rising
pitch on a syllable in teacher, reflecting the tonal contour of the
corresponding L1 word. Asian tonal
speakers demonstrated even more pronounced L1 tonal transfer, which
sometimes overrode canonical English
stress patterns. Mandarin or Thai speakers occasionally maintained L1
pitch distinctions on English words, resulting in utterances that diverged from
expected stress placement, producing a characteristic L1-influenced intonation.
By contrast, European stress-dominant
L1 speakers generally adhered closely to English stress norms. Their
speech displayed the typical stress-timed rhythm of English, with syllables of
varying duration and emphasis. However, pitch variation was narrower compared
to tonal L1 speakers. This suggests that while European L1 speakers comply with
English rhythm and stress rules, their prosodic range is somewhat limited,
potentially reducing expressive pitch variation.
Stress Patterns
Differences between participant groups were
also evident in stress realization.
- African
tonal speakers often
produced speech approximating a syllable-timed
rhythm, with relatively uniform syllable durations and weaker stress contrasts. This
pattern likely reflects the influence of L1, where pitch rather than
stress conveys meaning. For instance, in words like record (noun),
stress was often distributed more evenly rather than emphasized on the
first syllable as in native English.
- European
stress-dominant L1 speakers maintained strong stress contrasts and a clear stress-timed rhythm,
consistent with native English norms. This pattern corresponded with
higher intelligibility scores, confirming that proper stress placement is
crucial for comprehension.
- Asian
tonal speakers exhibited
variable behaviour. Some retained L1 pitch patterns, while others
approximated L2 stress placement. This variability illustrates the complex
interplay between L1 tonal retention and adaptation to English stress,
showing that prosodic transfer is not uniform even within a single L1
group.
Intelligibility
Effects
Listener evaluations indicated that utterances
with native-like stress patterns and
clearly defined rhythmic structures were consistently rated as most
intelligible. Conversely, when L1 tonal
transfer conflicted with English stress expectations, intelligibility
decreased, especially for listeners unfamiliar with the speaker’s L1. For
example, a Mandarin speaker using rising tones on English nouns could cause
comprehension difficulties, requiring greater cognitive effort from the
listener. Repeated exposure appeared to mitigate some of these intelligibility
challenges, supporting previous findings that familiarity with non-native
accents improves listener adaptation (Kumari & Kumar, 2024). Computational
analyses of suprasegmental features, including pitch contours and stress
placement (de la Fuente & Jurafsky, 2024), corroborated these results,
confirming systematic differences in tone and stress representation across
languages and learning contexts.
Cross-Linguistic
Implications
These results demonstrate that interactions between tone and stress systems
are systematic rather than random. In multilingual speech, L1 prosodic
features do not simply interfere with L2 stress; rather, they interact in
predictable ways depending on the speaker’s L1 type and experience. From a
practical perspective, this suggests that teaching or modelling English prosody
in multilingual settings should emphasize
prosodic adaptation rather than rigid enforcement of canonical
stress-timed rhythm or native speaker norms. For instance, African tonal
speakers may benefit from instruction integrating tonal awareness with English
stress patterns, while Asian tonal speakers may require exercises that balance
L1 tonal retention with intelligible English stress. Such strategies could
enhance comprehension and reduce listener effort in international and
multilingual communication contexts.
Summary
of Acoustic and Intelligibility Measures
The combined analysis of acoustic and
perceptual data reveals clear patterns in how prosodic features influence
English intelligibility across different L1 backgrounds.
Table 4.1
summarizes the key measures for each participant group:
|
Participant
Group |
Average F0
Range (Hz) |
Average
Syllable Duration (ms) |
Stress
Accuracy (%) |
Average
Intensity (dB) |
Mean
Intelligibility Score |
|
African Tonal L1 |
65.2 ± 12.3 |
210 ± 25 |
72% |
68 ± 5 |
4.1 ± 0.5 |
|
Asian Tonal L1 |
70.8 ± 10.7 |
205 ± 30 |
69% |
66 ± 4 |
3.9 ± 0.6 |
|
European Stress L1 |
45.5 ± 8.9 |
195 ± 20 |
88% |
70 ± 5 |
4.3 ± 0.4 |
Notes:
- Values represent the mean ±
standard deviation, except for stress accuracy, which is given as a
percentage of correctly stressed syllables.
- F0 range reflects pitch
variability; syllable duration captures rhythm; intensity measures
loudness; intelligibility scores are based on listener ratings using a
5-point scale.
Interpretation:
- European
stress-dominant speakers scored highest in both stress accuracy and intelligibility,
reinforcing the critical role of stress placement in understanding
English.
- African
and Asian tonal speakers exhibited greater pitch variation, reflecting their L1 tonal
patterns. While this adds richness to speech, it sometimes interferes with
English stress norms, slightly reducing intelligibility.
- Variations in syllable duration
and intensity also influenced comprehension, though more subtly,
highlighting the interplay between rhythm, emphasis, and listener
perception
Visualization
of Prosody and Intelligibility
A simple bar chart can illustrate the
relationships between intelligibility,
stress accuracy, and pitch variation across participant groups:
Intelligibility Score
5 ┤
█████
4 ┤
████ ████
3 ┤ ████
2 ┤
1 ┤
African Asian
European
Tonal
Tonal Stress
L1 L1 L1
FIGURE 1: Intelligibility Score
- Bars represent
average intelligibility scores.
- Overlaid
markers can indicate F0 range or stress accuracy, helping visualise
how tonal or stress-dominant backgrounds influence listener comprehension.
- This figure shows that European
stress-dominant speakers achieved the highest intelligibility, while tonal
speakers retained L1 pitch patterns but showed slightly lower stress
accuracy.
Analysis of the data clearly
indicates that stress placement is the most influential factor
in determining English intelligibility, highlighting the
critical role of correctly emphasizing syllables. In addition, the transfer
of L1 tonal patterns into English has a noticeable effect on
prosody, particularly among African and Asian tonal speakers. These results
suggest that fostering prosodic adaptation, rather
than rigidly enforcing native speaker stress norms, is more effective in
enhancing listener comprehension. Furthermore, the study found that acoustic
measurements such as F0 range, syllable duration, and intensity closely
correspond with perceptual ratings, demonstrating that these features are reliable indicators of how
easily speech can be understood. Taken together, these findings underscore the systematic
interaction between tone and stress in multilingual speakers,
offering important insights for language teaching, accent training, and
communication strategies in global English contexts. These findings
collectively highlight the systematic interaction between tone and stress in
multilingual speakers, and provide clear implications for teaching, accent
training, and communication strategies in global English contexts.
Implications
Language
Teaching
The findings of this study have significant
implications for language teaching,
particularly in multilingual contexts. Instruction should extend beyond
teaching the correct pronunciation of individual sounds to include an explicit
focus on both tone and stress systems.
Learners benefit from exposure to diverse prosodic patterns and practical
strategies for producing intelligible speech across different contexts. For
example, exercises that integrate tonal awareness with stress placement can
help speakers of tonal languages adapt more effectively to the rhythm and
intonation of English (Ojochegbe et al., 2024). Such an approach not only
improves comprehension by both native and non-native listeners but also
empowers learners to communicate confidently in diverse linguistic
environments.
Speech
Technology
The results also have important implications
for speech technology, including
automatic speech recognition (ASR) and text-to-speech (TTS) systems. Current
systems often struggle with non-native prosody, especially when tonal and
stress patterns deviate from canonical English norms. Training these systems to
recognize and reproduce a broader range
of tonal and stress variations can significantly enhance accuracy and
naturalness in speech processing. Recent research highlights the importance of layered suprasegmental representations
that account for pitch, rhythm, and stress in addition to segmental features,
enabling better handling of diverse accents and multilingual speech inputs
(de la Fuente & Jurafsky, 2024; Dossou, 2023).
Professional
Communication
The study also underscores critical
considerations for professional and
international communication. In global settings, speakers should attend
not only to the accuracy of individual words but also to prosodic elements such as rhythm, stress
clarity, and pitch variation. Adapting these features to the listener’s
expectations can greatly enhance intelligibility across accents. For example, emphasizing
key words with appropriate stress, maintaining a clear rhythmic flow, and
modulating pitch can help ensure messages are understood even when the
speaker’s accent differs from native norms. Such strategies are particularly
crucial in professional, diplomatic, or academic contexts, where clear
communication is essential.
Conclusion
The present study highlights that tone and stress are deeply interconnected in
multilingual speech. Tonal characteristics can shape how stress is
realized in English, while stress patterns themselves may adjust in response to
tonal influence. Together, these interactions affect rhythm, pitch modulation,
and overall speech intelligibility. Understanding this complex interplay
provides valuable insights into multilingual phonology and offers practical
guidance for language educators, speech technology developers, and
professionals engaged in international communication. As English increasingly
functions as a global lingua franca, multilingual prosody should be regarded as
a strength rather than a limitation,
enhancing clarity and facilitating comprehension across diverse linguistic
backgrounds
Recommendations
Several practical recommendations can be
proposed:
- Language
Teaching: Educators
should integrate explicit instruction on both tone and stress into pronunciation and listening activities.
Learners, particularly those from tonal language backgrounds, should
receive guided practice to adapt L1 tonal patterns to English stress
conventions, while maintaining intelligible speech. Exposure to a variety
of prosodic patterns and repeated communicative exercises can improve
learners’ ability to convey meaning clearly and confidently in diverse
settings.
- Speech
Technology:
Developers of automatic speech
recognition (ASR) and text-to-speech (TTS) systems should
incorporate models that account for tonal and stress variation. Layered
suprasegmental representations, which capture pitch, rhythm, and stress
alongside segmental features, will enhance the system’s ability to process
and generate speech from multilingual speakers, improving usability and
inclusivity.
- Professional
and International Communication: In global contexts, speakers should focus
not only on accurate word pronunciation but also on prosodic features such as stress
clarity, rhythmic flow, and pitch modulation. Adapting these
elements to listener expectations enhances intelligibility across
different accents, reduces miscommunication, and supports effective
interaction in professional, academic, and diplomatic environments.
By implementing
these strategies, educators, technologists, and professionals can better
accommodate the rich prosodic diversity of multilingual English, promoting clear, intelligible, and inclusive
communication in increasingly globalized contexts.
References
Cao, M., Pavlik, P. I., Jr., & Bidelman, G.
M. (2024). Enhancing lexical tone learning for second language speakers:
Effects of acoustic properties in Mandarin tone perception. Frontiers
in Psychology, 15, 1403816. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1403816
Choi, K., So, W., & Lam, A. (2017). Lexical
tone and stress perception in Cantonese-speaking ESL children. Journal
of Second Language Pronunciation, 3(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.3.1.03cho
De la Fuente, A., & Jurafsky, D. (2024). A
layer-wise analysis of Mandarin and English suprasegmentals in self-supervised
speech models. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13678
Dossou, B. F. P. (2023). Addressing
African-accented English in speech technology: Opportunities for ASR systems. Computational
Linguistics and Speech Processing Journal, 41(2), 122–139.
Gordon, M. (2023). The phonetic basis for
tone–stress interactions: A cross-linguistic study. In J. van de Weijer (Ed.), Part II
Syllable, Stress, and Sign (pp. 171–190). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730081-009
Hao, L., Gong, Q., & Zhang, J. (2023). The
effect of stress on Mandarin tonal perception in continuous speech for
Spanish-speaking learners. Interspeech 2023, ISCA Archive.
Kumari, S. S., & Kumar, D. H. N. (2024).
Intelligibility vs. accessibility of spoken English: A phonetic study. Migration
Letters, 21(S2), 1643–1657.
Ladefoged, P., & Johnson, K. (2014). A course
in phonetics (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Levis, J. (2018). Pronunciation and intelligibility in L2 English.
Cambridge University Press.
Li, Y. (2024). A tone-based hierarchical
structure of Chinese prosody. In Proceedings of the 23rd Chinese National
Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 1201–1211). Chinese
Information Processing Society of China. https://doi.org/10.5555/2024.ccl-1.93
Lin, J., Zhang, H., & Lin, X. (2022).
Prosodic transfer in English literacy skills among Chinese elementary-age
students: Controlling for non-verbal intelligence. Journal of Intelligence, 10(4),
114. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10040114
Ojochegbe, R., Tersoo, A., & Nicodemus, N.
(2024). Teaching intelligibility in African English classrooms: A focus on
phonological and suprasegmental features. International Journal of Applied Linguistics,
34(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12845
Thir, V. (2023). Co-text, context, and
listening proficiency as crucial variables in intelligibility among nonnative
users of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45,
1210–1231. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263123000207
Yip, M. (2002). Tone. Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, J., Meng, Y., Wu, C., & Yuan, Z. (2023). Spoken word recognition across language boundaries: ERP evidence of prosodic transfer driven by pitch. Brain Sciences, 13(2), 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13020202
0 Comments