<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="P92-1038">
  <Title>ON THE INTONATION OF MONO- AND DI-SYLLABIC WORDS WITHIN THE DISCOURSE FRAMEWORK OF CONVERSATIONAL GAMES</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="283" end_page="283" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
READY I\[ INSTRUCT
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> B: Okay.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="4" start_page="283" end_page="284" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
ACKNOWLEDGE
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> 2As a comparison with Clark and Schaefer (1987) embedded games often coincide with instances of embedded contributions in the acceptance phase.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Conversational game structure, offers a taxonomy which specifies both the function and context of an utterance, as move z within game y. This facilitates the study of the function of intonational tune, since the tune reflects an utterance's conversational role.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> Intonation in Games Using data from map task dialogues (Anderson et at., 1091), I have been analyzing mono- and di-syllabic words which compose single moves within themselves: right, okay, yes, no, mmhmm, and nhhuh. In addition, I am categorizing the cases where these words form part of a move. They typically surface as 5 of the 12 moves in the games analysis (Kowtko et at., 1991): READY, ACKNOWL-EDGE, ALIGN, REPLY-Y, and REPLY-N. The current data set consists of 68 utterances spoken by 3 of the 4 conversants in 2 dialogues.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> In order to compare my results with those of McLemore (1991) and Hockey (1991), I have tried to collapse moves and their contexts into the three general categories: ACKNOWLEDGE move following INSTRUCT serves to connect; READY, ACKNOWLEDGE (and other) moves which interrupt an INSTRUCT (i.e. precede a continued INSTRUCT move) continue; REPLY-Y, REPLY-N, ACKNOWLEDGE after EXPLAIN, and ACKNOWLEDGE after a response move (specifically elicited moves) segment.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> The data yield the following results s: 42% of rises (5 of 11) appear as connecting moves, 30% of levels (13 of 44) as continuing moves, and 69% of falls (9 of 13) as segmenting moves.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> Only one category approaches a match to other published results. It is possible that my decisions of which moves collapse together would not be corroborated and cause some of the disagreement. It is also possible that dialectal variation would account for some of the difference (The map task contains Scottish as opposed to American English), but it would be folly to wave such a hand of dismissal. These results reflect an intonation-based approach. Information may be lost in the process of collapsing various discourse contexts into three intonational categories (McLemore, 1991) and then limiting discourse categories to match those three existing intonational categories (Hockey, 1991). Separate discourse categories, in a discourse-based approach, should facilitate clearer results.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> When categorized according to move and discourse context, the data begins to speak on its  own. Granted, the numbers for each category are currently small and not statistically reliable, but some trends are striking and suggest that more data will prove to yield interesting results. For example, of 15 REPLY-Y/N moves, 12, or 80%, are levels, the 3 others being falls in a single category, REPLY-Y after QUERY-YN. All 4 cases of REPLY-Y after ALIGN are high levels, while REPLY-Y/N after QUERY-YN are mostly low levels (6 of 8).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> Work is progressing on other dialogues, amassing enough pitch trace data to allow clear patterns to emerge for each type of move in each game context. The goal is, given a discourse context, to be able to predict an utterance's function or move, given the intonation, and, conversely, predict intonational tune, given the type of move.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>