1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Arabic Linguistics
  4. Volume 1, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 1 Number 2
  • ISSN 2950-1806
  • E-ISSN: 2950-1792
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study is the first to examine how speakers deal with structural ambiguity arising from elliptical gapping constructions like , which may be interpreted with a gapping structure (both Shahad and Samar saw Aahad) or a non-gapping structure (Shahad saw both Aahad and Samar). The central question of this study explores the role that prosody plays in resolving such ambiguity in Hijazi Arabic. Analysis of productions from 24 native speakers reveals that various prosodic cues, such as mean F0, max F0, intensity, and excursion size, are used for unambiguous sentences, while pause occurrence, pause duration, and pitch accents are additionally utilised as disambiguation cues when ambiguity is recognised. The study reveals that speakers phonetically reflect syntactic structural differences in ambiguous sentences, particularly in relation to gapping. This distinction becomes more apparent when speakers are aware of ambiguity.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
2026-02-27
2026-03-17

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allbritton, D. W., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R.
    (1996) Reliability of prosodic cues for resolving syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(3), 714–735.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alzaidi, M.
    (2014) Information structure and intonation in Hijazi Arabic [Doctoral dissertation, University of Essex]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
  3. Baek, H.
    (2021) Prosodic disambiguation in first and second language production: English and Korean. Language and Speech, 65(3), 598–624. 10.1177/00238309211042041
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309211042041 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  5. Beach, C. M.
    (1991) The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(6), 644–663. 10.1016/0749‑596X(91)90030‑N
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90030-N [Google Scholar]
  6. Bever, T. G.
    (1970) The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. InJ. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and Language Development (pp.279–362). Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Boersma, P.
    (2001) Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International5:9/10, 341–345.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bryant, G. A., & Fox Tree, J. E.
    (2002) Recognizing verbal irony in spontaneous speech. Metaphor and Symbol, 17(2), 99–117. 10.1207/S15327868MS1702_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1702_2 [Google Scholar]
  9. Carlson, K.
    (2001) The effects of parallelism and prosody in the processing of gapping structures. Language and Speech, 44(1), 1–26. 10.1177/00238309010440010101
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309010440010101 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chodroff, E., & Cole, C.
    (2019) The phonological and phonetic encoding of information status in American English nuclear accents. Proceedings of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 661–665.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cooper, W., & Paccia-Cooper, J.
    (1980) Syntax and Speech. Harvard University Press. 10.4159/harvard.9780674283947
     https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674283947 [Google Scholar]
  12. Duez, D.
    (1982) Silent and non-silent pauses in three speech styles. Language and Speech, 25(1), 11–28. 10.1177/002383098202500102
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098202500102 [Google Scholar]
  13. Harrington Stack, C., & Watson, D. G.
    (2023) Pauses and Parsing: Testing the Role of Prosodic Chunking in Sentence Processing. Languages, 8(3), 157. 10.3390/languages8030157
     https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8030157 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hellbernd, N., & Sammler, D.
    (2016) Prosody conveys speaker’s intentions: Acoustic cues for speech act perception. Journal of Memory and Language, 881, 70–86. 10.1016/j.jml.2016.01.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hellmuth, S.
    (2006) Intonational pitch accent distribution in Egyptian Arabic [Doctoral dissertation, SOAS University of London]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
  16. Hirschberg, J., & Avesani, C.
    (1997) The role of prosody in disambiguating potentially ambiguous utterances in English and Italian. Intonation: Theory, Models and Applications, 189–192.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., & Westfall, P.
    (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal, 50(3), 346–363. 10.1002/bimj.200810425
     https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kang, S., & Speer, S. R.
    (2003) Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic clause boundaries in Korean. InG. Garding & M. Tsujimura (Eds.), WCCFL 22 Proceedings (pp.259–272). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Kraljic, T., & Brennan, S.
    (2005) Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic structure: For the speaker or for the addressee?Cognitive Psychology, 501, 194–231. 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  20. McCarthy, J.
    (1979) On stress and syllabification. Linguistic Inquiry, 10(3), 443–465.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. O’Brien, M., Jackson, C., & Gardner, C.
    (2014) Cross-linguistic differences in prosodic cues to syntactic disambiguation in German and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 351, 27–70. 10.1017/S0142716412000252
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000252 [Google Scholar]
  22. Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. B.
    (1990) The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. InP. R. Cohen, J. L. Morgan, M. Jerry, & M. E. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in Communication (pp.271–311). A Bradford Book. 10.7551/mitpress/3839.003.0016
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3839.003.0016 [Google Scholar]
  23. Price, P. J., Ostendorf, M., Shattuck-Hufnagel, S., & Fong, C.
    (1991) The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 90(6), 2956–2970. 10.1121/1.401770
     https://doi.org/10.1121/1.401770 [Google Scholar]
  24. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2022) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Ross, J.
    (1970) Gapping and the order of constituents. InM. Bierwisch & K. Heidolph (Eds.), Progress in Linguistics (pp.249–259). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783111350219.249
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111350219.249 [Google Scholar]
  26. Schafer, A. J., Speer, S. R., Warren, P., & White, S. D.
    (2000) Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(2), 169–182. 10.1023/A:1005192911512
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005192911512 [Google Scholar]
  27. Shen, X.
    (1993) The use of prosody in disambiguation in Mandarin. Phonetica, 501, 261–271. 10.1159/000261946
     https://doi.org/10.1159/000261946 [Google Scholar]
  28. Snedeker, J., & Trueswell, J.
    (2003) Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 103–130. 10.1016/S0749‑596X(02)00519‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00519-3 [Google Scholar]
  29. Speer, S. R., Warren, P., & Schafer, A. J.
    (2011) Situationally independent prosodic phrasing. Laboratory Phonology, 2(1), 35–98. 10.1515/labphon.2011.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.002 [Google Scholar]
  30. Trott, S., Reed, S., Kaliblotzky, D., Ferreira, V., & Bergen, B.
    (2023) The role of prosody in disambiguating English indirect requests. Language and Speech, 66(1), 118–142. 10.1177/00238309221087715
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309221087715 [Google Scholar]
  31. Vigário, M.
    (2003) Prosody and sentence disambiguation in European Portuguese. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 21, 249–278. 10.5565/rev/catjl.52
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.52 [Google Scholar]
  32. Watson, D., Breen, M., & Gibson, E.
    (2006) The role of syntactic obligatoriness in the production of intonational boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1045–1056.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Weber, A., Grice, M., & Crocker, M. W.
    (2006) The role of prosody in the interpretation of structural ambiguities: A study of anticipatory eye movements. Cognition, 99(2), B63–B72. 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Xu, Y.
    (2013) ProsodyPro — A tool for large-scale systematic prosody analysis. InTools and Resources for the Analysis of Speech Prosody (pp.7–10). Aix-en-Provence, France.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
Loading
When prosody meets syntax in Hijazi Arabic gapping
Arabic Linguistics 1, 216 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
/content/journals/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
/content/journals/10.1075/arli.00012.fud
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ellipsis; gapping; Hijazi Arabic; prosody; structural ambiguity; syntax

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error