Rhythm and Phrasing
Outline
in Language and Music (part 1)
Dicky Gilbers & Maartje Schreuder
Paper available on
http://www.let.rug.nl/~gilbers/papers
http://www.let.rug.nl/~s chreudr/
F aculty of Arts
Department of Linguis tics
P.O. B ox 716
9700 AS Groningen
T he Netherlands
Jackendoff and Lerdahl
• Jackendoff & Lerdahl (1980) point out the
resemblance between the ways both linguists
and musicologists structure their research
objects
• Lerdahl & Jackendoff (1983) A Generative
Theory of Tonal Music, MIT Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts
Synthesis of linguistic methodology and the
insights of music theory
A Generative Theory of Tonal
Music
(Lerdahl & Jackendoff, 1983)
• The research object is structured hierarchically
and in each domain the important (heads) and
less important (dependents) constituents are
defined by preference rules
• Preference rules determine which outputs, i.e. the
possible interpretations of a musical piece, are
well-formed
• Structural resemblance between language and
music
• Claim: every form of temporally ordered
behaviour is structured the same way
• Claim: insights of music theory can help out in
phonological issues
• Rate adjustments in language and music:
rhythmic variability
A Generative Theory of Tonal Music
• Description of how a listener (mostly
unconciously) constructs connections in the
perceived sounds
• The listener is capable of recognizing the construction of a piece
of music by considering some notes/chords as more prominent
than others
cf. Language
• Our cognition thus works in a way comparable
to how a reader divides a text (often
unconciously too) into different parts
Preference Rules
• Preference rules indicate the optimal
interpretation of a piece
• Preference rules, however, are not strict
claims on outputs
• It is even possible for a preferred interpretation of a
musical piece to violate a certain preference rule as
long as this violation leads to the satisfaction of a
more important preference rule
1
 Optimality Theory Potentially Conflicting, Soft Constraints
(Prince & Smolensky 1993)

• This evaluation system appears to be very • In both theories well-formedness constraints

familiar to linguists
• In OT well-formedness constraints on
outputs also determine grammaticality
on outputs apply simultaneously to
representations of structures
• In both theories these constraints are
potentially conflicting and they are soft,
which means violable

Tuxedo Junction
motif

phrase

Structuring of the Domains

section

Prosodic Construction of a Phrase

x
x x
x x x
x x x x x x Comparison Preference Rules
Mis sis sip pi Del ta
s w s w s w syllable level

w s s foot level

w
phrase level

2
 Comparison preference rules 1 Arguments for trochaic feet
• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 1): Mispronunciations: Acquisition data:
Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or narcis, parfum

the note) which is in a relative strong metrical

position (= the first position in a measure)

• Language:
1;6
Choose the first σ in a Σ as the head

Comparison preference rules 2 Comparison preference rules

• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 2): • Music (time-span reduction preference rule 2):
Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or
the note) which is relatively harmonically the note) which is relatively harmonically
consonant (segmental markedness) consonant (segmental markedness)

• Language (peak prominence): C > C7 > … > Csus4 > Cdim

Choose as the head the heaviest available syllable

C vs C0 C vs C0
• C > Cdim • C > Cdim
F if th C - G C - G b
0 .5 0 .5

0 0

-0 . 5
-0 . 5 0 0 .0 2
0 0 .0 2 T im e (s )
T im e ( s )

3
 C vs C0 C vs C0
• C > Cdim • C > Cdim
F if th C - G F if th C - G
0 .5 0 .5

0 0

-0 . 5 -0 . 5
0 0 .0 2 0 0 .0 2
T im e ( s ) T im e ( s )

C vs C0 C vs C0
• C > Cdim • wave C+G
C - G b
0 .5 0 .9 5 3

0 0

-0 . 5 - 0 .9 5 3
0 0.0 9 51 5 48
0 0 .0 2
T im e ( s )
T im e (s )

C vs C0 Comparison preference rules

• wave C+Gb • Language:
Peak Prominence: stress the heaviest available
0 .9 9 8 7
syllable: CVVC; CVCC > CVC; CVV > CV

ki.dhar sa.mi.ti
0
as.baab ru.kaa.yaa
reez.ga.rii aas.maan.jaah
-0 . 9 9 8 7
0 0 .0 9 4 5 9 1 3
T im e (s )

Stress assignment in Hindi: Peak Prom. >> Nonfinality

4
 Tonic - Dominant - Subdominant
Comparison preference rules
• Examples of 3 chord songs:
• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 7):
mccoys - hang on sloopy (russell & farrell)
Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or royal guardsmen - snoopy vs. the red baron (gernhard & holler)
the note) which emphasizes the end of a group as rolling stones - get off of my cloud (jagger & richard)
grease soundtrack -summer nights (jacobs & casey)
a cadence
any trouble - second choice (gregson)
sonics - psycho (roslie)
C7-B standells - sometimes good guys don’t wear white (cobb)
tonic > dominant > subdominant > parallel ...
C7-F r.e.m.- stand! (buck, stipe, mills, berry)
rare breed - beg, borrow and steal (difrancesco & zerato)
cadence kingsmen - louie louie (r.berry)
• cf. Language: Phrasal rule

Time-span reduction
Mozart: Sonata K.331, I Conflict
The A6-chord is in a metrically stronger position,
but E-chord is harmonically more consonant

Time-spans
constraints → TSRPR 7 TSRPR 2 TSRPR 1
candidates ↓
☛ E *
A6 *! *
Conflict TSRPR1 - TSRPR7

First Language Acquisition Data Segmental markedness: /s/ > /x/

segmental & positional Positional markedness: /x/ > /s/
markedness: same preference
syllabe syllabe
(1;9) (2;0)
onset rhyme onset rhyme

margin nucleus margin nucleus

pre-m. m.core satellite peak satellite coda app. pre-m. m.core satellite peak satellite coda app.
k l ѐ k s x a p
b r o d
s t u l *Complex >> Pos. Markedness >> Segm. Markedness

5
Assumption: insights from music theory can help us
to describe some problematic cases of rhythmic Music: Re-/misinterpretation of rhythm in
variability in phonology accelerated or sloppy playing

• Question: Does a higher speaking rate lead • Rhythmic restructuring:

to adjustment of the phonological structure dotted notes rhythm → triplet rhythm
or are we only dealing with phonetic
compression?

• Phonetic compression is mainly shortening and merging 120 bpm:

of vowels and consonants with preservation of the
phonological structure. 80 bpm:

Language: Re-/misinterpretation of rhythm in Language: Re-/misinterpretation of rhythm in

accelerated or sloppy speaking accelerated or sloppy speaking

Zuidafrikaans (andante) Zuidafrikaans (allegro)

Zuidafrikaans (andante)

Zuidafrikaans (allegro)

Language: Re-/misinterpretation of rhythm in Language: Re-/misinterpretation of rhythm in

accelerated or sloppy speaking accelerated or sloppy speaking

Data: bijstandsuitkeringsgerechtigde
fototoestel
andante
studietoelage
tijdsduurindeling
fototoestel
allegro In fast speech it is more important to avoid clashes.
The triplet patterns in fast Dutch speech resemble the
patterns of Estonian rhythm

6
 Conclusion

• Structural resemblance between language and music

(cf. also Lasher (1978), Mallen (2000))

Every form of temporally ordered behaviour is

structured the same way
• Insights of music theory can help out in phonological
issues
There are different OT-grammars for different
rates and styles of speaking