Abstract The central goal of this study was to study how contrastive accent is realised phonetically in three regional varieties of Standard Spoken Finnish. Speakers from the Oulu, Turku and Tampere regions produced unaccented and contrastively accented versions of the target words. Fundamental frequencies and segment durations were measured in all the target words, and in the contrastively accented versions also the temporal distance of the F0 peak from word onset. In the unaccented words, F0 fluctuations were very small, indicating once more that in Finnish, too, mere word stress is not realised tonally. In the words with CV.CV(X) structure, the lengthening of segment durations due to stress was restricted to the initial syllable in Tampere, whereas in Oulu and Turku the lengthening extended to the second syllable. The width of the fall-rise F0 pattern realising contrastive accent was in all word structures widest in the Oulu variety, and the narrowest in the Tampere variety. In the Turku variety CV.CV(X) words, the F0 peak occurred further away from word onset than in any other words investigated. The differences in segment durations among the varieties were similar in the unaccented words and in the contrastively accented ones, with one exception: the duration of V1 in the unaccented CV.CV(X) words was the same across the varieties, but in the contrastively accented CV.CV(X) words the duration of V1 was shorter in the Turku variety than in the other varieties. The durational ratio of V1 and V2 in the Turku variety – as in the Oulu variety – was different from the durational ratio in the Tampere variety: in Turku and Oulu V2 had a longer duration than V1, whereas in Tampere V1 had a longer duration than V2. This confirms earlier observations that Turku and Oulu belong to regions in which the V2 of CV.CV(X) words is half-long (longer than V1), but Tampere does not. However, the present study shows that the relative half-long duration of the V2 of CV.CV(X) words is achieved differently in Turku and Oulu: in Turku through the short duration of V1, but in Oulu through the long duration of V2. / Tiivistelmä Tämän tutkimuksen keskeisin tavoite oli selvittää, miten kontrastiivinen aksentti toteutuu foneettisesti kolmelta eri suomen murrealueelta kotoisin olevien yleiskielisessä puheessa. Oulun, Turun ja Tampereen seuduilta kotoisin olevat koehenkilöt tuottivat tutkimuksen jokaisesta kohdesanasta sekä aksentoimattoman että kontrastiivisesti aksentoidun esiintymän. Tuotetuista kohdesanoista mitattiin perustaajuuksia, äännesegmenttien kestot sekä kontrastiivisesti aksentoituiduista sanoista F0:n huipun etäisyys sanan alusta. Aksentoimattomissa sanoissa F0:n muutokset olivat kaikissa tutkituissa suomen varieteeteissa erittäin vähäisiä, mikä taas kerran todisti, ettei suomessakaan pelkkä sanapaino toteudu tonaalisesti. Sanapainon toteutumisessa kestojen avulla oli varieteettien välisiä eroja CV.CV(X)-rakenteisissa sanoissa: Tampereen varieteetissa sanapainon toteutumisala rajoittui ensimmäiseen tavuun, mutta Turun ja Oulun varieteeteissa se ulottui myös toiseen tavuun. Kontrastiivista aksenttia toteuttavan F0:n nousu–lasku-kuvion laajuus oli kaiken rakenteisissa kohdesanoissa suurin Oulun varieteetissa, pienempi Turun varieteetissa ja kaikkein pienin Tampereen varieteetissa. Muutoin kontrastiivisen aksentin toteutumisessa F0:n avulla oli huomattavia varieteettien välisiä eroja vain CV.CV(X)-rakenteisissa sanoissa: Turun varieteetin CV.CV(X)-sanoissa F0:n huippukohta sijaitsi kauempana sanan alusta kuin kaikissa muissa tutkituissa sanoissa, eli kauempana kuin muun rakenteisissa Turun varieteetin sanoissa ja kaiken rakenteisissa Oulun ja Tampereen varieteettien sanoissa. Varieteettien väliset segmenttien kestoerot olivat samat aksentoimattomissa ja kontrastiivisesti aksentoiduissa sanoissa, lukuun ottamatta sitä, että CV.CV(X)-rakenteisten sanojen V1:n kestossa ei aksentoimattomissa sanoissa ollut varieteettien välisiä eroja, mutta kontrastiivisesti aksentoiduissa sanoissa kyseisen segmentin kesto oli lyhempi Turun varieteetissa kuin muissa varieteeteissa. Tällä tavoin Turun varieteetin kontrastiivisesti aksentoiduissa CV.CV(X)-sanoissa toteutui V1:n ja V2:n kestosuhde, joka – samoin kuin Oulun varieteetin vastaava kestosuhde – poikkeaa Tampereen varieteetin vastaavasta kestosuhteesta: Turussa ja Oulussa V2 on V1:tä pitempikestoinen, Tampereella päinvastoin V1:n kesto on V2:n kestoa suurempi. Tämä vahvistaa ne aiempien tutkimusten tulokset, että Turku ja Oulu ovat ns. puolipidennysmurteiden aluetta, mutta Tampere ei. Kuitenkin tämä tutkimus osoitti, että kontrastiivisesti aksentoitujen sanojen puolipidennys saadaan Turun varieteetissa aikaan pikemminkin lyhytkestoisen V1:n kuin pitkäkestoisen V2:n avulla, kun taas Oulun varieteetissa puolipidennys syntyy nimenomaan pitkäkestoisen V2:n avulla. Kaiken kaikkiaan suurin osa tutkimuksessa todetuista varieteettien välisistä selvistä perustaajuus- ja kestoeroista koski CV.CV(X)-rakenteisia sanoja, jotka ovatkin erikoinen suomen sanatyyppi yksimoraisen ensi tavunsa vuoksi.

This thesis explores the variable behavior of bare nouns in Persian. Bare singular nouns realize different grammatical functions, including subject, object and indirect object. They receive different interpretations, including generic, definite and existential readings. However, the task of understanding the reasons for, and limits on, this variation cannot be achieved without understanding a number of pivotal features of Persian sentential architecture, including Information Structure, prosody, word order, and the functions of various morphological markers in Persian. After a brief introduction, chapters 2-3 deal with bare noun objects, firstly comparing them with nominals marked with indefinite morpheme -i suffixed to the noun, and the determiner yek. A bare noun object differs from morphologically marked nominals as it shows properties associated with noun incorporation in the literature (chapter 2). Of particular interest are the discourse properties of these ‘quasi-incorporated’ nominals. With respect to the discourse transparency of Incorporated Nominals, Persian belongs to the class of discourse opaque languages within Mithun’s classification (1984). However, under certain circumstances, Persian bare nouns show discourse transparency. These circumstances are examined in chapter 3, and it is proposed that bare nouns do introduce a number neutral discourse referent. There are no overt anaphoric expressions that could match such number-neutral antecedents in Persian. But covert anaphora lack number features, and hence can serve as means to pick up a number-neutral discourse referent. Also, in case world knowledge tells us that the number-neutral discourse referent is anchored to an atomic entity or to a collection, then an overt singular pronoun or an overt plural pronoun might fit the combined linguistic and conceptual requirements, and may be used to pick up the number-neutral discourse referent. This proposal is phrased within Discourse Representation Theory. In the second half of the dissertation, the interpretation of bare nouns in different positions and with different grammatical functions are discussed. Under the independently supported hypothesis of position>interpretation mapping developed by Diesing (1992), we will see the role of the suffix -ra in indicating that an object has been moved out of VP. Following Diesing, I assume that VP-internal variables are subject to an operation of Existential Closure. In many cases, VP-external –ra-marked objects have a different interpretation to their VP-internal, non-ra-marked, counterparts, because of escaping Existential Closure. For subjects, there is no morphological marking corresponding to –ra on objects, and we have to rely on prosody and word order to determine how a VP is interpreted using theories of the interaction of accent and syntactic structure. We assume that VP-internal subjects exist, under two independent but converging assumptions. The first is prosodic in nature: Subjects can be accented without being narrowly focused; theories of Persian prosody predict then that there is a maximal constituent that contains both the subject and the verb as its head. The second is semantic in nature: Bare nouns require an external existential closure operation to be interpreted existentially, and we have to assume existential closure over the VP for our analysis of the interpretation of objects. So, this existential closure would provide the necessary quantificational force for bare noun subjects as well. It is proposed that both subject and object originate within the VP, and can move out to the VP-external domain. The motivation for these movements are informational-structural in nature, relating in particular to the distinctions between given and new information, and default and non-default information structure.

This thesis explores the variable behavior of bare nouns in Persian. Bare singular nouns realize different grammatical functions, including subject, object and indirect object. They receive different interpretations, including generic, definite and existential readings. However, the task of understanding the reasons for, and limits on, this variation cannot be achieved without understanding a number of pivotal features of Persian sentential architecture, including Information Structure, prosody, word order, and the functions of various morphological markers in Persian. After a brief introduction, chapters 2-3 deal with bare noun objects, firstly comparing them with nominals marked with indefinite morpheme -i suffixed to the noun, and the determiner yek. A bare noun object differs from morphologically marked nominals as it shows properties associated with noun incorporation in the literature (chapter 2). Of particular interest are the discourse properties of these ‘quasi-incorporated’ nominals. With respect to the discourse transparency of Incorporated Nominals, Persian belongs to the class of discourse opaque languages within Mithun’s classification (1984). However, under certain circumstances, Persian bare nouns show discourse transparency. These circumstances are examined in chapter 3, and it is proposed that bare nouns do introduce a number neutral discourse referent. There are no overt anaphoric expressions that could match such number-neutral antecedents in Persian. But covert anaphora lack number features, and hence can serve as means to pick up a number-neutral discourse referent. Also, in case world knowledge tells us that the number-neutral discourse referent is anchored to an atomic entity or to a collection, then an overt singular pronoun or an overt plural pronoun might fit the combined linguistic and conceptual requirements, and may be used to pick up the number-neutral discourse referent. This proposal is phrased within Discourse Representation Theory. In the second half of the dissertation, the interpretation of bare nouns in different positions and with different grammatical functions are discussed. Under the independently supported hypothesis of position>interpretation mapping developed by Diesing (1992), we will see the role of the suffix -ra in indicating that an object has been moved out of VP. Following Diesing, I assume that VP-internal variables are subject to an operation of Existential Closure. In many cases, VP-external –ra-marked objects have a different interpretation to their VP-internal, non-ra-marked, counterparts, because of escaping Existential Closure. For subjects, there is no morphological marking corresponding to –ra on objects, and we have to rely on prosody and word order to determine how a VP is interpreted using theories of the interaction of accent and syntactic structure. We assume that VP-internal subjects exist, under two independent but converging assumptions. The first is prosodic in nature: Subjects can be accented without being narrowly focused; theories of Persian prosody predict then that there is a maximal constituent that contains both the subject and the verb as its head. The second is semantic in nature: Bare nouns require an external existential closure operation to be interpreted existentially, and we have to assume existential closure over the VP for our analysis of the interpretation of objects. So, this existential closure would provide the necessary quantificational force for bare noun subjects as well. It is proposed that both subject and object originate within the VP, and can move out to the VP-external domain. The motivation for these movements are informational-structural in nature, relating in particular to the distinctions between given and new information, and default and non-default information structure.