This book discusses the morphological properties of intonation, building on past research to support the long-recognized relationship between the functions and meanings of discourse particles and the functions and meanings of intonation. The morphological status of intonation has been debated for decades, and this book provides evidence from the literature combined with new and compelling empirical evidence to show that specific intonational forms correspond to specific segmental discourse particles. Based on the conclusion that intonation is in the lexicon, it proposes syntactic positions for intonational meanings using a cartographic approach. It also describes how intonation is represented in speakers' minds, which has important implications for first and second language acquisition as well as for theories and approaches to artificial speech recognition and production. This book is of interest to theoretical and applied linguists, as well as to anyone whose research and interests relate in any way to intonation.

Autorentext
John C. Wakefield is an Associate Professor at Hong Kong Baptist University. He has published works on Cantonese discourse particles and intonation, as well as on sociopragmatics and acquiring Cantonese as a second language. He is the editor of the book Cantonese as a Second Language: Issues, Experiences and Suggestions for Teaching and Learning (Routledge), and is the author of a forthcoming book titled English Loanwords in Cantonese: How Their Meanings Have Changed (HKU Press).

Inhalt
Chapter 1. IntroductionChapter 2. The Forms and Functions of Intonation2.1 The Functions of Suprasegmentals2.2 A Definition of Intonation Based on Its Functions2.3 The Forms of Suprasegmentals2.4 Concluding RemarksChapter 3: Intonational Meaning3.1 The Nature of Intonational Meaning3.1.1 Context-dependent vs. context-independent meaning3.1.2 Compositional vs. holistic meaning3.1.3 Phonological similarity and homophony3.1.4 Gradient vs. categorically distinct forms and meanings3.1.5 The Linguists Theory of Intonational Meaning3.1.6 Testing the Linguists Theory of Intonational Meaning3.2 Intonation and Discourse Particles3.2.1 Intonation and segmental particles are two forms of the same thing3.2.2 The similar debates about particle and intonational meanings3.3 Concluding RemarksChapter 4: Evidence of the Morphological Nature of Intonation4.1 Tonal Grammatical Particles and Their Segmental Counterparts4.2 Tonal Discourse Particles and Their Segmental Counterparts4.3 Concluding RemarksChapter 5. Evidence via Cantonese5.1 The Cantonese Language5.1.1 Why Cantonese is ideal for this kind of research5.1.2 Intonation in Cantonese5.1.3 Cantonese sentence-final particles5.2 The Design of the Research5.2.1 The participants5.2.2 The corpus and the dialogues5.2.3 Data collection5.2.4 Data analysis5.3 Defining Sentence-final Particles5.3.1 The Natural Semantic Metalanguage theory5.3.2 Defining sentence-final particles with the natural semantic metalanguage5.4 Concluding RemarksChapter 6: The Results of the Research6.1 Two Evidential Particles: lo1 and aa1maa36.1.1 The particle lo16.1.2 The particle aa1maa36.1.3 Summary and analysis6.2 Two Question Particles6.2.1 The particle me16.2.2 The particle aa46.2.3 Summary and analysis6.3 Two 'Only' particles: ze1 and zaa36.3.1 The particles ze1 and zaa36.3.2 Summary and analysis6.4 Concluding RemarksChapter 7: The Syntax of Intonation7.1 Background Information7.1.1 Intonation and syntax7.1.2 Cartographic syntax7.2 Tonal Morphemes that Function as Grammatical Particles7.3 Tonal Morphemes that Function as Discourse Particles7.3.1 The syntax of polar interrogative particles7.3.2 The syntax of discourse particles7.4 Prosodic Structure7.5 Concluding RemarksChapter 8: Conclusions and ImplicationsAppendixReferences