In the absence of these, it becomes tedious for audience to organize the flow of speech into parts that make sense (Tone and Moody 30). Can comparison between spoken and written discourse bring confusion? However, they are principles that make an idea in spoken remain very flexible. For instance, hesitation marks like uh or exclamations like a dude! Have the ability to compromise a whole unit if is denoted as a prominent tonic syllable. On the other hand, a speech that is organized a tone unit is capable of completing syntactic chunk comprising of 7-8 words and a prolonged melodic contour. The article provides us with machinery whereby competent English speakers and listeners can comprehend spoken discourse.
The Pitch is adopted as the tone unit that fragments sketches of spoken text. Pitch movement and level of prominence are applied in identification of tonic segment boundary. I think the article provides the ground for an expansion of tone units whereby intermediate prominences can be incorporated. The article provides us with numerous ways whereby unit boundary recognition can be realized among English users. This begs the question whether these boundaries are easily recognizable. It is evident that the boundaries are not obviously identifiable (Tone and Moody 34).
Competency in speaking and hearing of English require skills and knowledge about the language. How can a speaker be able to lay emphasis on given information in tone unit? Prominence feature helps in identification of tonic segment margin. The usage of CAPS indicts this. This makes me understand why I hear prominence as an amplified use of length, pitch and volume on the stressed syllable in a prominent word. Consequently, we can tell when a speaker stresses certain information in tone unit (Tone and Moody 56).
By reading the article, I understand that pausing is the common boundary marker that comes in mind when considering speech