Listening to people reading 227One further point can be made about this reading. It concerns the use of
both tone choice and prominence, but in a rather different way. Notice, first,
that the tone unit
//p until HALF TIME //selects low termination and thus results in pitch sequence closure. Compare
this with a later pitch sequence closure:
//r in an ADjoining SECtion //p of the STAND //On the basis of the argument we have used above, stand scarcely qualifies
for prominence—it could scarcely be an adjoining section of anything else.
And even if it is given prominence redundantly as we have said it might be,
a referring tone would seem more likely: if an adjoining section can be
treated as coming within the area of shared understanding, of the stand
could surely be as well. The apparent double anomaly is due, of course, to
the need to close the pitch sequence. It is a general feature of the intonation
system that, while prominence is most often used to indicate a sense selection,
it can also be used to indicate a selection on one of the meaning oppositions
that intonation choices themselves realize. In this case, the sole purpose of
the last tone unit might be said to be to carry the sequence-closing combination
of low termination and proclaiming tone.
The other sequence closure in the extract exemplifies another common
way of bringing it about. We have:
...//r against the PRESent CUP holders //p RURiTAnia //Here, the two-prominence form of Ruritania, that we have associated earlier
with citation, is used to enable the reader to make separate choices in the
key and termination systems: to bring about sequence closure while retaining
mid key for the tone unit. It might be argued that this is unnecessary: that
an appropriate reading would recognize the existential equivalence of present
cup holders and Ruritania with low key:
//r against the PRESent CUP holders //p ruriTAnia //