Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði - 01.01.1985, Blaðsíða 48

46
Ari Páll, Friðrik, Margrét og Sigrún
Kristján Árnason. 1978. Quantity, Stress and the Syllable in Icelandic: Formal
vs. Functional Arguments. E. Gárding, G. Bruce & R. Bannert (ritstj.):
Nordic Prosody. Papers from a Symposium, bls. 137—142. Travaux de
l’Institut Linguistique de Lund 13, Lund.
— 1980. Some Processes in Icelandic Connected Speech. E. Hovdhaugen
(ritstj.): The Nordic Languages and Modern Linguistics [4]:212 —222.
Universitetsforlaget, Oslo.
— . 1983. Áhersla og hrynjandi í íslenskum orðum. íslenskt mál 5:53—80.
Lehiste, Ilse. 1970. Suprasegmentals. The MIT Press, Cambridge.
Magnús Pétursson. 1978. Intonationen i den enkle deklarative sætning i islandsk.
E. Gárding, G. Bruce & R. Bannert (ritstj.): Nordic Prosody. Papers from a
Symposium, bls. 33 — 41. Travaux de I’Institut Linguistique de Lund 13,
Lund.
Repp, Bruno H. 1981. On Levels of Description in Speech Research. Journal of
the Acoustical Society of America 69:1462— 1464.
Shankweiler, D.P., W. Strange & R. Verbrugge. 1977. Speech and the Problem of
Perceptual Constancy. R. Shaw & J. Bransford (ritstj.): Perceiving, Acting
and Comprehending: Toward an Ecological Psychology, bls. 315 — 346.
Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N. J.
Sveinn Bergsveinsson. 1941. Grundfragen der islándischen Satzphonetik. Ejnar
Munksgaard, Kobenhavn.
SUMMARY
This paper reports on an experimental phonetic research that dealt with the problem
of contrastive stress in Icelandic.
The material of the research was ten nouns, five of the type CV:CV and five of the
type CVC:V. These nouns were put into the following environment: Ég sé_núna (/
see—now). Ten speakers were asked to read ten such sentences in four ways, i.e. with
and without contrastive stress on the noun in question and both fast and slowly. This
was done twice. The outcome was eighty sentences from each speaker. Of these, four
hundred sentences were picked out at random for measurement.
The following measurements were made: a) changes in fundamental frequency (Fo),
b) quantity of the stressed vowel, c) quantity of the following consonant. Finally, we
looked at d) the ratio between phonologically long and short segments in the stressed
syllables.
The results may be summarized as follows: Contrastive stress in Icelandic is charac-
terized by a) an increase of fundamental frequency (Fo), b) an increase of the quantity
of both vowels and consonants and c) an increase of the difference in length between
phonologically long and short segments.
These results confirm the findings of Höskuldur Þráinsson (1983).
Moreover, the results seem to imply an unexpected difference between the two syl-