Language and Music in Optimality Theory

1
Language and Music in Optimality Theory
2
Outline

• Structural resemblance between language and music
• Claim every form of temporally ordered behaviour
  is structured the same way
• Claim insights of music theory can help out in
  phonological issues
• Rate adjustments in language and music
  compression or restructuring?

3
Jackendoff and Lerdahl

• Jackendoff Lerdahl (1980) point out the
  resemblance between the ways both linguists and
  musicologists structure their research objects.
• Lerdahl Jackendoff (1983) A Generative Theory
  of Tonal Music, MIT Press, Cambridge,
  Massachusetts.
• Synthesis of linguistic methodology and the
  insights of music theory

4
A Generative Theory of Tonal Music

• Description of how a listener (mostly
  unconciously) constructs connections in the
  perceived sounds
• The listener is capable of recognizing the
  construction of a piece of music by considering
  some notes/chords as more prominent than others

cf. Language

• Our cognition thus works in a way comparable to
  how a reader divides a text (often unconciously
  too) into different parts

5
A Generative Theory of Tonal Music(Lerdahl
Jackendoff, 1983)

• The research object is structured hierarchically
  and in each domain the important (heads) and less
  important (dependents) constituents are defined
  by preference rules
• Preference rules determine which outputs, i.e.
  the possible interpretations of a musical piece,
  are well-formed

6
Preference Rules

• Preference rules indicate the optimal
  interpretation of a piece. Some outputs are more
  preferred than others
• Preference rules, however, are not strict claims
  on outputs. It is even possible for a preferred
  interpretation of a musical piece to violate a
  certain preference rule as long as this violation
  leads to the satisfaction of a more important
  preference rule

7
cf. Optimality Theory (Prince Smolensky 1993)

• Optimality Theory is a theory of language and
  grammar in which well-formedness constraints on
  outputs determine grammaticality.
• These constraints apply simultaneously to
  representations of structures. They are
  potentially conflicting and they are soft, which
  means violable.

8
Structuring of the Domains
9
Tuxedo Junction
motif
phrase
section
10
Prosodic Construction of a Phrase

• x
• x x
• x x x
• x x x x x x
• Mis sis sip pi Del ta
• s w s w s w
• w s s
• w

syllable level
foot level
phrase level
11
Comparison structuring rules

• Music
• The domains in the music theory are called
  Time-spans Rhythmical units constructed from the
  interaction of the metrical structure and the
  grouping structure.
• metrical structure
• (lower domains) ...
• melodic/harmonic (or grouping) structure
• (higher domains) motif

XTC English roundabout
12
Comparison structuring rules

• Language
• phoneme
• p pa papa de oude papa
• phoneme
• p -pje bloempje muurbloempje

13
Comparison Preference Rules
14
Comparison preference rules 1

• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 1)
• Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or
  the note) which is in a relative strong metrical
  position ( the first position in a measure)
• Language
• Choose the first ? in a ? as the head

15
Arguments for trochaic feet

• Neologisms Acquisition data
• Cito, Prolog, Brinta
• Mispronunciations
• narcis, parfum

16
16
Comparison preference rules 2

• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 2)
• Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or
  the note) which is relatively harmonically
  consonant (segmental markedness)
• Language (peak prominence)
• Choose as the head the heaviest available
  syllable

17
Comparison preference rules

• Language
• Peak Prominence stress the heaviest available
  syllable CVVC CVCC CVC CVV CV

ki.dhar as.baab reez.ga.rii
sa.mi.ti ru.kaa.yaa aas.maan.jaah
Stress assignment in Hindi Peak Prom.
Nonfinality
18
Comparison preference rules

• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 2)
• Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or
  the note) which is relatively harmonically
  consonant (segmental markedness)
• C C7 Csus4 Cdim

Over smaak valt te twisten
19
C vs C0

• C Cdim

20
C vs C0

• C Cdim

21
C vs C0

• C Cdim

22
C vs C0

• C Cdim

23
C vs C0

• C Cdim

24
C vs C0

• wave CG

25
C vs C0

• wave CGb

26
Comparison preference rules

• Music (time-span reduction preference rule 7)
• Choose as the head of a time-span the chord (or
  the note) which emphasizes the end of a group as
  a cadence
• tonic dominant subdominant parallel ...
• cf. Language Phrasal rule

C7-B C7-F cadence
27
Tonic - Dominant - Subdominant

• Examples of 3 chord songs
• mccoys - hang on sloopy (russell
  farrell)
• royal guardsmen - snoopy vs. the red baron
  (gernhard holler)
• rolling stones - get off of my cloud (jagger
  richard)
• grease soundtrack -summer nights (jacobs
  casey)
• any trouble - second choice (gregson)
• sonics - psycho (roslie)
• standells - sometimes good guys dont wear white
  (cobb)
• r.e.m.- stand! (buck, stipe, mills,
  berry)
• rare breed - beg, borrow and steal
  (difrancesco zerato)
• kingsmen - louie louie (r.berry)

28
Time-span reduction
Mozart Sonata K.331, I
Time-spans
Conflict TSRPR1 - TSRPR7
29
Conflict

• The A6-chord is in a metrically stronger
  position, but E-chord is harmonically more
  consonant

constraints ? TSRPR 7 TSRPR 2
TSRPR 1 candidates ? ? E
A6 !


30
First Language Acquisition Data
segmental positional markedness same preference

• syllabe
• onset rhyme
• margin nucleus
• pre-m. m.core satellite peak
  satellite coda app.
• k l
  ? k
• b r o d
• s t u l

31
Segmental markedness /s/ /x/
Positional markedness /x/ /s/

• syllabe
• onset rhyme
• margin nucleus
• pre-m. m.core satellite peak
  satellite coda app.
• s x a p

(20)
Complex Pos. Markedness Segm. Markedness
32
Conclusion

• Structural resemblance between language and music
  
• (cf. also Lasher (1978), Gilbers (1984, 1987),
  Mallen (2000), Gilbers Schreuder 2002))
• Every form of temporally ordered behaviour is
  structured the same way