Questions:
1) How can we compare the pitch range on a constituent in 
narrow focus in one utterance with the pitch range on the
same constituent in another utterance of the same sentence
with broad focus?
2) How can we capture a picture (e.g., a spectrogram and
a pitch track, or two overlaid pitch tracks) into an image
that can be read as a figure into an Evil Empire doc file?

Sentence that we will work with is:

walad sharaa ktaab
boy   bought book

See the script "overlaysF0.praat" and the speech files and
TextGrid that are collected in WaladShaaraKtab.Collection
on our course web page.  They are linked in directly after 
the link for these notes.


notes on PRACTICE THREE EASY
-------------------------------------------------------------
<<yellow1>>

The analysis that the "Guidelines ... " developers made:

There's a lovely yellowish old one.
           |      |        |      ]
         L+H*   L+H*     L+H*     L-L%

Some of you had a L* accent on "one".  See our discussion
from last class of these "strong" seemingly accented words 
in long post-nuclear tails.  Also see Grice, Arv

There's a lovely yellowish old one.
           |      |        |   |  ]
         L+H*   L+H*     L+H*  L* L-L%


-------------------------------------------------------------
<<really1>>

That's really illuminating.  (utterance 3)
        |        |        ]
      L+H*    L+!H*       L-L%

Some of you had L-H% for the boundary tone.  This is a 
common kind of "borderline" case, where the lack of final 
lowering that we associate with L% makes us want to transcribe 
a "continuation rise" even though there is no clear pitch 
rise.  Contrast the very clear continuation rise in <<windy>>.


-------------------------------------------------------------
<<eileen1>> versus <<eileen2>>

This pair illustrates the contrast between L*+H and L+H*.


-------------------------------------------------------------
<<calling3>>

The pair of utterances in this file illustrates two different
"calling contours".  These calling contours have been discussed
a lot in the literature and they are a very stereotypical context 
for the !H-, which was originally analyzed as a "mid" tone.  The
suggestion that these "mid" tones are actually downstepped "high"
tones is one of the most salient contributions of Pierrehumbert
(1980).


-------------------------------------------------------------
<<windy>>

This utterance is from the NOA weather report, Cincinatti
station. The speaker has a rather late peak in L+H*.  Cf. 
the individual/dialectal differences that we discussed about
how people position themselves along the continuum from 
earliest peak in H* to latest peak in L*+H.


-------------------------------------------------------------
<<park4>>

The analysis that the "Guidelines ... " developers made for 
the first "full" (i.e., non-filler) clause was:

in fact I have to go along the main road for a little ways,
    |                                |                    ]
    H*                             L+H*                   L-L%

Some of you had H* or !H* for the second accent.  This 
illustrates the difficulty of parsing the tune in the typically
very low reduced pitch range of an American adult male voice,
where the movements for the accents and such can be not any
larger than the segmental perturbations.

The analysis that the "Guidelines ... " developers made for 
the last clause was:

It's probably about three hundred yards.
       |               |           |   ]
       H*             !H*         !H*  L-L%

(I think now I might say L+H* L+!H* L+!H* L-L% instead.)

This was intended as an example of the difficulty of being 
sure of the type and even presence of accent in a very reduced
pitch range for downstep, and in fact some of you did transcribe
it with no accent on "yards".