國立臺灣師範大學博碩士論文全文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	林欣怡 Hsin-Yi Lin
論文名稱：	台灣地區中文禮貌語氣聲學訊號研究 An Acoustic Study on the Tone of Voice in the Politeness Talks in Taiwan Mandarin
指導教授：	謝國平 Tse, Kwock-Ping
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	英語學系 Department of English
論文出版年：	2007
畢業學年度：	95
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	108
中文關鍵詞：	禮貌理論、語氣、社會關係、熟悉度、性別、聲學訊號
英文關鍵詞：	Politeness Theory, Tone of voice, Social relationship, Familiarity, Gender, Acoustic cue
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：251 下載：17
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

本研究旨在探討對話者的關係對於他們對話語氣的影響。我們研究了三個社會關係因素：說話者的性別〈男生或女生〉、聽者的性別〈男生或女生〉，還有對話者彼此熟悉的程度〈非常熟—好朋友或完全不熟—陌生人〉。我們想要瞭解的問題是，說話者在面對不同的聽話者時，是如何調整自己的語氣，而這些語氣又是如何地反應在聲學訊號上。在收集語料方面，我們利用讓受試者配對玩字卡遊戲的方式，來引發他們對話並且錄音。接著我們檢視目標聲學訊號的表現，檢視的訊號是焦點字上的：句尾延長、音頻範圍、音頻高度，還有母音空間。分析結果顯示，對話者之間的關係的確會影響他們對話時的語氣，不過在同一種語氣裡的不同的語音訊號，似乎擔負不同的功能。女性的說話者，面對朋友時會有較長的句尾延長，面對男性對話者時會有較低的音頻。男性的說話者所做的調整，則大部分都是針對異性，他們面對女性時會有較長的句尾延長和較高的音頻。而男女說話者在面對男性陌生人的時候，都會有比較大的母音空間。
所得到的結果顯示，當對話者兩人之間的關係較遠時，對話語氣未必比較正式〈較短的句尾延長，較高的音頻高度、較窄音頻範圍和較大的母音空間〉，反而是有相互配合的情況，像是面對女性聽話者時音頻較高，而面對男性時則較低。

The present study intends to investigate the influence of interlocutors’ social relationships on their tones of voice when they converse. Three social factors were involved for testing: the gender of the speaker (male or female), and the gender of the interlocutors (males or females), the degree of familiarity between the interlocutors (close friend or stranger). The questions we wanted to ask were: how speakers adjust their tones when they speak to listeners of different familiarity and gender; and how these tones of speech are practiced in the prosodic cues of their speeches. Speech for analysis was collected by having pairs of talkers playing the Word Card Display Game, and their conversation was recorded. The examined cues were final lengthening, pitch range, pitch register, and vowel space of the designed focused syllables. The results implied that interlocutors’ relationship did have influence on their tone of voice when they converse. However, different prosodic cues within a tone seem to be respondent to different social factor of the relationship. For female speakers, they would lengthen the duration for friends, and lower their pitch for males; for male speakers, their adjustments were mostly done for the listeners of the opposite gender: their durations were longer for females, and pitch higher also for females. As for the vowel space, both male and female would have larger vowel space for male strangers.
Such results reflect that farther social distance between speakers do not necessarily elicit more formal tone of voice (shorter duration, higher pitch register, narrower pitch range, and larger vowel space). Speakers in our study showed that accommodation is also a mechanism at work (ex. lower pitch register for male hearers and higher pitch register for female hearers).

TABLE OF CONTENT
CHINESE ABSTRACT……………………………………………….……………ii
ABSTRACT……………….………………………………………….……………iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………….……………iv
VITA………………………………………………………………....……………..vi
TABLE OF CONTENT……..…………………………………………………….vii
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES..……………………………………………ix

Chapters:
1.    Introduction…………………………………………………………….………….1

1.1 Introduction……………………………………………………….…………...1
1.2 Significance………………………………………………….…………...........3
1.3 Aims of Study……………………………………………………………..…..6
1.4 Organization…………………………………………………………...............7

2.    Literature Review…………………………………………………....…………….9

2.1    Politeness Theory……………………………………………………..........10
2.2    The Prosody in Politeness Talk in Different Cultures……………………...13

3.    Method………………………………………………………………………….27

3.1    Subjects……………………………………………………………………...28
3.2    Stimuli……………………………………………………………….............29
3.3    Equipment.…………………………………………………………………..30
3.3.1    Equipments for Conversation Elicitation—
Word Card Display Game……………………………………………30
3.3.2    Equipment for Conversation Recording……..……………………….31
3.4    Procedure……………………………………………………………..............32
3.5    Labeling.……………………………………………………………...............34
3.6    Acoustic Measurement……………………………………………….............36

4.    Judgment Test……………………………………………………….....……...... 40

4.1    Subjects……………………………………………………………….…..….40
4.2    Materials………………………………………………………………….….41
4.3    Equipment..……………………………………………………………….… 43
4.4    Procedure………………………………………………………………….... 42
4.5    Results of the Judgment Test…………………………………………….…. 43

5.    Results………………………………………………………………………........46

5.1    Final Lengthening…………………………………………………….…….. 46
5.1.1 Final Lengthening…………………………………………….………..46
5.1.2 Data Selection Criteria for Duration Analysis………………….…….. 47
5.1.3 Overall ANOVA for Duration of Final Syllable……………….…….. 47
5.1.4 Results with Duration of Female Speakers…………………….……... 49
5.1.5 Results with Duration of Male Speakers……………………….………51
   5.2 Pitch………………………………………………………………….………52
      5.2.1 Pitch Range…………………………………………………….………52
      5.2.2 Data selection for pitch analysis……………………………….………53
      5.2.3 ANOVA for Pitch Range……………………………………….……...54
      5.2.4 ANOVA for Pitch Register………………………………….………56
   5.3 Vowel Space………………………………………………………….……...60
      5.3.1 Vowel Space…………………………………………………….……..60
      5.3.2 Data Selection Criteria for Vowel Space……………………….……...60
      5.3.3 Female’s Vowel Space……………….……………………….………..61
      5.3.5 Male’s Vowel Space………………………….……………….………..62

6.    General Discussion……………………………………………………..………..65

6.1    Summary of Results………………………………………………………….65
6.2    Discussion…………………………………………………...………….……68
6.2.1Duration…………………………………………………...…..………..69
6.2.2Pitch Range…………………………………………...………….......…73
6.2.3Vowel Space………………………………………...………….…….....78

7.    Conclusion……………………………………………..……………………...…80

Appendix A: Questionnaire for Judgment Test…....………..…………………..…....83
Appendix B: Profile of Subjects in Production Experiment…………………………84
Appendix C: Recording Duration of the Subjects……………………...……………87
Appendix D: Profile of Subjects in Judgment Test………………………………….88
Appwndix E: Contribution of Each Subject in Acoustic Analysis…………………..89
References…………………………………………………………….………….......93

List of Tables and Figures

Table
Table 4.1  The selected subjects by the judgment test…………………………..….45
Table 5.1  Overall ANOVA results for Final Lengthening……………………..….48
Table B.1  Profile of female subjects in the female same-gender friend group…....84
Table B.2  Profile of male subjects in the male same-gender friend group……...…85
Table B.3  Profile of male and female subjects in the different-gender friend group…………………………………………………………………….86
Table C.1 Recording duration of each friend pair……………………………………87
Table C.2 Recording duration of each stranger pair……………………………….…87
Table D.1 Profile of subjects in Judgment Test………………………………………88
Table E.1 The number of cases of the target phrases contributed by same-gender friend pairs for acoustic analysis…………………………...………………89
Table E.2 The number of cases of the target phrases contributed by same-gender strangers for acoustic analysis……………………………………………..90
Table E.3 The number of cases of the target phrases contributed by different-gender pairs for acoustic analysis, including friend pairs and stranger pairs………91
Table E.4 The number of cases of the target phrases contributed by same-gender strangers for acoustic analysis…………………………………………...…92

Figure
Figure 2.1 The mean values of politeness scores rated by 20 subjects for the
polite/casual source utterances with the “polite final prosody”
(P-prosody) and “clasual final prosody”……………………..….…20
Figure 3.1 The Equipments for Word Card Display Game………………….……….31
Figure 3.2 The layout of the equipment for recording………………………….32
Figure 3.3 The labeling window for the phrase “dian4qi4de0qi4”
‘The qi4 in electric equipment’…………………….……………….…..35
   Figure 3.4 The measurement of the duration of W1 and W2………….…………..…37
Figure 3.5 The measurement of the peak of W1 and valley of W2…………………..38
Figure 3.6 The measurement of F1 and F2 of W1 and W2…………………………...39
Figure 5.1 A scatter plot female speakers’ for W1 and W2 durations…………….…49
Figure 5.2 A scatter plot for male speakers’ W1 and W2 durations…………………51
Figure 5.3 A bar graph for female and male speakers’ pitch range in semitone……..56
Figure 5.4 A high-low graph for female and male speakers’ pitch range,
pitch peak, and pitch valley in Hertz…………………………………...58
Figure 5.5 A graph for females’ vowel space in W1…………………………………61
Figure 5.6 A graph for females’ vowel space in W2…...…….……………………....62
Figure 5.7 A graph for males’ vowel space in W1…...……….……………………...63
Figure 5.8 A graph for males’ vowel space in W2………...….……………………...64
                                

Aguilar, L & Machuca, M. (1995). Pragmatic factors affecting the phonetic properties of diphthongs. EUROSPEECH-1995, Madrid, Spain.
Ambady, N., Koo, J., et al. (1996). More than words: linguistic and nonlinguistic politeness in two cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5): 996-1011.
Anderson, A. H., Bader, M., et al. (1991). The HCRC Map Task Corpus. Language and Speech, 34: 351-366.
Boersma, P. (1993). Accurate short-term analysis of the fundamental frequency and the harmonics-to-noise ratio of a sampled sound. Proceedings of the Institute of Phonetic Sciences, Univerity of Amsterdam, 17:97-110.
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. D. (2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. London, Cambridge University.
Bryant, G. A. (2004). Prosodic Features of Verbal Irony in Spontaneous Speech. Department of Psychology, Santa Cruz, California University. Dissertation of Doctor of Philosophy.
Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., et al. (2000). Human Conversation as a System Framework: Designing Embodied Conversational Agents. Embodied Conversational Agents. J. Cssell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost and E. Churchill. Cambridge, Massachusetts & London, England, The MIT Press.
Chang, N-C. T. (1958). Tones and intonation in the Chengtu dialect. Phonetica, 2: 60-84.
Chao, Y. J. (1948). Mandarin primer an intensive course in spoken Chinese, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Chen, F., Li, A., et al. (2004). Acoustic analysis of friendly speech. International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Montreal.
Chen, Y. (2006). Durational adjustment under corrective focus in Standard Chinese. Journal of Phonetics, 34: 176-201.
Chiang, W-y, & Tsa, P-s. (2007). PICE: four strategies for BBS talk in Taiwan and their interactions with gender configuration and topic orientation. Language and Linguistics, 8.2:417-446.
Cowie, E. D., Campell, N., et al. (2003). Emotional speech: Towards a new generation of databases. Speech Communication, 40: 33-60.
Duffy, B. R.,Dragone, M., et al. (2005). A social robot architechture: a frame work for explicit social interaction. Android Science, Cognonitive Science 2005 Workshop Stresa, Italy.
Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answer from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgments of competence. European Review of Social Psychology, 5:1-35.
Fon, J. (2006). Shape Display: task design and corpus collection. Paper presented in the 3rd Speech Prosody, Dresden, Germany.
Gobl, C. & Chasaide, A. H. (2003). The role of voice quality in communicating emotion, mood and attidude. Speech Communication, 40: 189-212.
Graddol, D. & Swann, J. (1992). Gender Voices. Blackwell Publishers. Oxford, United Kingdom.
Grundy, P. (2000). Doing Pragmatics. London, Armold, London and Oxford Unicerity Press Inc., New York.
Gu, Z., Mori, H., et al. (2003). Prosodic variations in disyllabic meaningful words focused with different stress patterns in Mandarin Chinese. Acoustical Science and Technology, 24(3):111-119.
Gu, Zhenglai, Hiroki Mori et al. (2003). Analysis of vowel formant frequency variations between focus and neutral speech in Mandarin Chinese. Acoustical Science and Technology, 24(4): 192-193.
Guodong, L. & Jing, H. (2005). A contrastive study on disagreement strategies for politeness between American English & Mandarin Chinese. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1): from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march_05_lghj.php
Gupta, S., Romano D. M., et al. (2005). Politeness and variation in synthetic social interaction. Human-Animated Characters Interaction Workshop, Paper presented in the 19th British HCI Group Annual Conference Napier University, Edinburgh, UK
Henton, C. G. (1989). Fact and fiction in the description of female and male pitch. Language & Communication, 9(4): 299-311.
Holmes, J. (2001). Style, context and register. In G. Leech & M. Short (Eds.), An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 223-257:Longman.
Holtgraves, T. & Yang J-N. (1990). Politeness as Universal: Cross-Cultural Perceptions of Request Strategies and Inferences Based on Their Use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59: 719-729.
Huston, T. L. & Ashmore, R. D. (1986). Women and Men in Personal Relationships. In D. Richard (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Female-Male Relations: A Critical Analysis of Central Concepts. Ashmore, Frances K. Del Boca. Orlando, San Diego, New York & Austin: Academic Press.
Ito, M. (2001). Rating experiments of spoken Japanese Politeness. Paper presented in Postgraduate Conference 2001-Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, The University of Edinburgh.
Ito, M. (2002). Japanese politeness and suprasegmentals: A study based on natural speech materials. Paper presented in Speech Prosody 2002, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Kallia, A. (2004). Linguistic politeness: The implicature approach. Multilingua, 23: 145-169.
Kanda, T., Sate R., et al. (2004). Friendly social robot that understands human's friendly relationships. Paper presented in 2004 1EEE/lRS.J International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Sendal, Japan.
Katherine, We. M. & Tronick E. Z. (1994). Beyond the face: An empirical study of infant affective configurations of facial, vocal, gestural, and regulatory behaviors. Child Development, 65: 1503-1515.
Ladefoged, P. (2001). Acoustic phonetics. A Course in Phonetics, 161-198.
Lee, Y. L. (1977). Correlation among attitudinal factors, speed and tone sandhi in Chinese [Fall]. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 7: 129-41.
Loveday, L. (1981). Pitch, politeness and sexual role: an exploratory investigation into the pitch correlates of English in the Japanese politeness formulae. Language and Speech, 24: 71-89.
Marcus, D. K. & Lehman S. J. (2002). Are there sex differences in interpersonal perception at zero acquaintance? A social relations analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 36: 190-207.
Ohala, J. J. (1983). Cross-language use of pitch: an ethological view. Phonetica, 40:1-18
Ohala, J. J. (1984). An ethological perspective on common cross-language utilization of F0 of voice. Phonetica, 41: 1-16.
Ofuka, E., McKeown, D. J., et al. (2000). Prosodic cues for rated politeness in Japanese speech. Speech Communication, 32: 199-127.
Paeschke, A. & Sendlmeier, W. F. (2000). Prosodic characteristics of emotional speech: measurements of fundamental frequency movements. Paper presented in the ISCA-Workshop on Speech and Emotion, UK.
Pardo, J. S. (2006). On phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119(4): 2382-2393.
Ross, E. D., Edmondson J. A., et al. (1986). The effect of affect on various acoustic measures of prosody in tone and non-tone languages: a comparison based on computer analysis of voice. Journal of Phonetics, 14: 283-302.
Schegloff, E. (1998). Reflections on studying prosody in talk-in-interaction. Language and Speech, 41(3-4): 235-263.
Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney. D. L. (2003). Meaning and emotion in animal vocalizations. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1000: 32-55
Sheldon, A. (1993). Pickle Fight: Gendered Talk in Preschool Disputes. In D. Tannen (Eds.), Gender and Conversational Interaction. New York, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Tannen, D. 1990. Different words, different worlds. You Just Don’t Understand: Woman and Men in Conversation. Ballantine Books. New York.
Torrey, C., Fussell, S. R., et al. (2005). Appropriate accommodations: speech technologies and the needs of older Adults. Pittsburgh, USA, (Unpublished Manuscript). Human Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University,.
Wichmann, A. (2000). The attitudinal effects of prosody, and how they relate to emotion. Paper presented in ISCA WORKSHOP (ITRW) on Speech and Emotion: A Conceptual Farmword for Research, BELFAST, Queen’s University.
Wikipedia. (2007). Politeness Strategies. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politeness_theory.
Yuasa, I. (1998). Politeness strategies observed in pitch ranges employed by Japanese men and women. Crossroads of Language, Interaction, and Culture, 1: 27-42.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文