Focus and Word order in KoreanSpring 2007LIN 393P Laboratory PhonologyJihwan KimIntroduction• ‘Focus’ has been “focused” both in phonetics/phonology and in syntax/semantics, as well as in pragmatics.• Word order, on the other hand, has been less “focused” than ‘focus’ in its phonetic realization, and been regarded as a matter of syntax or semantics.Introduction• In the field of phonetics and phonology, focus is dealt with in the domain of prosody and tone.• For example, it is widely known that a focused word/ phrase has a longer duration and a larger pitch range than that of a neutral word.• Jun and Lee (1998) reported how (contrastive) focus in Korean is realized both phonetically and phonologically.Introduction• In a discourse, focus is regarded as a ‘new’information whereas topic as a ‘given’ one, as in Liberman and Pierrehumbert (1984).• By contrast, topic is the word/phrase which is previously mentioned in the preceding context.• If a new word is introduced in the discourse, the new word is likely to be phonetically prominent.Introduction• There have been claims from syntax and semantics that focus is related with the word order.• As for word order in Korean, it is regarded that Korean has free word order, or allows a free ‘preposing’ of its arguments (Choe 1994).• This ‘preposing’ is, as she claimed, believed to have relation with focus movement.Introduction• Choi (1996) claimed that DO is fronted when it is focused in Korean ditransitiveconstruction (henceforth KDC).• Further, an observation shows that Korean speakers prefer IO–DO order to DO–IO order in written text (Kim 2006).• This implies that DO in the DO–IO order is more susceptible to focus than IO in the IO–DO order.Introduction• The research question is how above factors, the object position and the word order, affect the phonetic realization of focus in Korean.• The basic assumption is that Korean speakers regard IO–DO order more canonical word order than DO–IO one.VIODO (focus)Focused orderVDOIONormal orderVerb2ndposition1stpositionOrderHypothesis• Followings are the hypothesis of this study:– The focused DOs in one object position have the greater phrase duration and the greater f0 than the non-focused DOs in the same position.– The focused DOs in one object position have the greater phrase duration and the greater f0 than the focused IOs in the same position.– The focused DOs in the first object position have the greater phrase duration and the greater f0 than the focused DOs in the second object position.Methods• Subjects:– 5 subjects participated in this experiment.– All of them are native Korean. Speakers are from Seoul, Korea’s capital city, and speak Seoul dialect (Seoul dialect shows the least tonal change in its phonetic realization).– Subjects were asked to read the sentences clearly and naturally.– None of them were instructed the target point of the study.Methods• Materials:– There were 40 pairs of KDC sentences in total. – Testing materials consist of two sentences. In the first sentence, one of the two objects is introduced.– The second sentence is a ditransitive construction, containing both previously introduced (topic) - and unintroduced (focus) objects. (40 * 2 = 80)– Each pair varies in focus, the focus position, and its word order.Methods• Materials:– The targets were phonetically controlled:– Each object is limited to 4 syllables, including the case marker, –eykey for IO and –lul for DO.– Each object begins with either a vowel, a nasal, or a glide.Methods• Recording procedure– Recording was take place in the Phonetic lab.– Materials were randomly ordered, and were presented with MS Powerpoint.– A 11 second pause were given between the pairs.– Subjects mostly spent 6 seconds for reading out the pair of sentences. After that, subjects could have a 5 second pause.Methods• Measurement procedure– In each pair, 1) the duration and 2) the maximum f0 of IO phrase and DO phrase were measured.– Measurements were done with Praat.– The statistical analysis was done with the factorial ANOVA.– Because within variation was bigger than between variation, ANOVA was done subject by subject.Result• Followings are the ANOVA result of f0 from one subject:1 1361.250 1361.250 .352 .5547 .352 .0881 16.200 16.200 .004 .9486 .004 .0501 2247.200 2247.200 .581 .4482 .581 .1131 9768.200 9768.200 2.527 .1163 2.527 .3311 4500.000 4500.000 1.164 .2842 1.164 .1771 530.450 530.450 .137 .7121 .137 .0651 54.450 54.450 .014 .9058 .014 .05272 278277.800 3864.969DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F-Value P-Value Lambda PowerFocusWord OrderObject PositionFocus * Word OrderFocus * Object PositionWord Order * Object PositionFocus * Word Order * Object PositionResidualANOVA Table for f0(Hz) Inclusion criteria: F1 from Focus and Word order in Korean• Followings are the ANOVA result of f0 from one subject:Results10 285.400 30.314 9.58610 307.500 65.759 20.79510 304.900 73.490 23.24010 334.000 65.218 20.62410 315.900 74.635 23.60210 304.700 60.065 18.99410 287.900 64.385 20.36010 290.300 51.951 16.428Count Mean Std. Dev. Std. Err.IO F, IO - DO, IOIO F, IO - DO, DOIO F, DO - IO, IOIO F, DO - IO, DODO F, IO - DO, IODO F, IO - DO, DODO F, DO - IO, IODO F, DO - IO, DOMeans Table for f0(Hz) Effect: Focus * Word Order * Object Position Inclusion criteria: F1 from Focus and Word order in KoreanResults050100150200250300350400Cell MeanIO F, IO - DOIO F, DO - IODO F, IO - DODO F, DO - IOCellDOIOInteraction Bar Plot for f0(Hz) Effect: Focus * Word Order * Object Position Error Bars: ?1 Standard Error(s) Inclusion criteria: F1 from Focus and Word order in KoreanResults• Followings are the ANOVA result of the duration from another subject:1 781.250 781.250 .289 .5928 .289 .0811 1051.250 1051.250 .388 .5351 .388 .0921 3781.250 3781.250 1.397 .2411 1.397 .2021 31.250 31.250 .012 .9147 .012 .0511 151.250 151.250 .056 .8138 .056 .0561 18301.250 18301.250 6.761 .0113 6.761 .7331 1711.250 1711.250 .632 .4292 .632 .11872 194910.000 2707.083DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F-Value P-Value Lambda PowerFocusWord OrderObject PositionFocus * Word OrderFocus * Object PositionWord Order * Object PositionFocus * Word Order * Object PositionResidualANOVA Table for Length(ms) Inclusion criteria: M3 from Focus and Word order in KoreanResult10 518.000 46.619 14.74210 508.000 38.528 12.18410 491.000 37.845 11.96810 523.000 51.435