Newsgroups: sci.lang,sci.lang.japan,alt.gobment.lones
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!dasher
From: dasher@netcom.com (Anton Sherwood)
Subject: Re: "pitch accent" vs. "tone"
Message-ID: <dasherDMwJAA.8AC@netcom.com>
Organization: That would be telling.
References: <4fqhja$kqi@news.mpd.tandem.com> <aldersonDMvzIG.3Kt@netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 04:03:45 GMT
Lines: 17
Sender: dasher@netcom11.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.lang:50353 sci.lang.japan:32342

Richard M. Alderson III <alderson@netcom.com> says:
: Pitch and stress are actually more closely related in their function than
: are pitch and tone.  In many languages "stress" has a large pitch component,
: as well as duration and/or intensity ("loudness").

The Votrax speech synthesizer used pitch *in lieu of* loudness.
I don't know whether that's true of newer devices.

What bothers me about pitch languages is not that they use pitch,
but that they use it differently!

2c
-- 
    KrazyKev is now putting my address on his magazine spams.
    I guess I annoyed him by responding to each one I received.
Anton Sherwood   *\\*   +1 415 267 0685   *\\*   DASher@netcom.com
I wasn't always anarcho-capitalist, you know.	--   Ubi scriptum?
