Language and Music in Optimality Theory

• 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?

Outline

• 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

Jackendoff and Lerdahl

• 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

A Generative Theory of Tonal Music

cf. Language• Our cognition thus works in a way

comparable to how a reader divides a text (often unconciously too) into different parts

• 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

A Generative Theory of Tonal Music

(Lerdahl & Jackendoff, 1983)

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

• 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.

cf. Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993)

Structuring of the Domains

Tuxedo Junction

motif

section

phrase

Prosodic Construction of a Phrase

x x x x x x x x x x x xMis sis sip pi Del ta

s w s w s w

w s s

w

syllable level

foot level

phrase level

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 < phrase < section ...

XTC:English roundabout

• Language: phoneme < (syllable) < (foot) < (phrase)

p pa papa de oude papa

phoneme < morpheme < word < compound

p -pje bloempje muurbloempje

Comparison structuring rules

Comparison Preference Rules

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

Arguments for trochaic feet

Neologisms: Acquisition data:Cito, Prolog, Brinta

Mispronunciations:narcis, parfum

1;6

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

Comparison preference rules

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

ki.dharas.baabreez.ga.rii

sa.mi.tiru.kaa.yaaaas.maan.jaah

Stress assignment in Hindi: Peak Prom. >> Nonfinality

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

C vs C0

• C > Cdim

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

Fifth C - G

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

C - Gb

C vs C0

• C > CdimTime (s)

0 0.02-0.5

0.5

0

Fifth C - G

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

C - Gb

C vs C0

• C > Cdim

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

Fifth C - G

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

C - Gb

C vs C0

• C > Cdim

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

Fifth C - G

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

C - Gb

C vs C0

• C > CdimTime (s)

0 0.02-0.5

0.5

0

Fifth C - G

Time (s)0 0.02

-0.5

0.5

0

C - Gb

C vs C0

• wave C+G

Time (s)0 0.0951548

-0.953

0.953

0

C vs C0

• wave C+Gb

Time (s)0 0.0945913

-0.9987

0.9987

0

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

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 don’t wear white (cobb)r.e.m.- stand! (buck, stipe, mills, berry)

rare breed - beg, borrow and steal (difrancesco & zerato)kingsmen - louie louie (r.berry)

Time-span reduction

Conflict TSRPR1 - TSRPR7

Mozart: Sonata K.331, I

Time-spans

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 *!

*

*

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

First Language Acquisition Data

segmental & positional markedness: same preference

syllabe

onset rhyme

margin nucleus

pre-m. m.core satellite peak satellite coda app.

s x a p

Segmental markedness: /s/ > /x/Positional markedness: /x/ > /s/

*Complex >> Pos. Markedness >> Segm. Markedness

(2;0)

• 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

Conclusion