A Grammar of Spoken English Discourse - The Intonation of Increments

Key and Termination – Increments 183

e.g. (33) and it remains to be seen whether or not an independent high-key
value is possible in non-minimal increments such as (35) below.

(33) you can ↑/\SEE this// [T2-Tr-14]

N V V' N #

Example (33) presents a minimal increment and, thus, it is entirely predict-
able that the high key/termination selection realizes both key and termina-
tion values. Tr projects a context where the target state is not contrary to
the previously generated discourse expectations: it serves to exemplify the
previous co-text. The high key/termination particularizes the lexical sense
of seeing and generates a local meaning of insistence which is further
strengthened by the co-presence of the rise-fall tone. One minimal incre-
ment fi nal high key/termination proved to be diffi cult to classify:

(34) you can see it in kash\↑MIR for example // [T2-Jt-14]

N V V' N P N PHR #

It is not clear whether or not Jt intended to particularize the lexical sense
Kashmir and generate a local meaning realizing the value of Kashmir of all
places or whether he intended solely to invite an active intervention from
the hearer. In other words, the communicative value of some high key/
terminations may prove to be ambiguous and the hearer who is actively
co-constructing the discourse with the speaker will have to decide whether
or not the contrastive implications realized are warranted or not.

(35) that is \/WHY the moment it looked // as if you could get

N V W+ d N+ N V a c N V V'

\↑PROgress // in \ISrael // and \↑PAlestine // it had to be

N+ P N c N N V V'

\↑STOPPED // [T2-Jt-33]

V'

Table 7.9 The communicative value of increment fi nal high key/termination

Contrary to discourse

expectations

Particularizing Neither contrary

nor particularizing

Unclassifi able Total

Text 1 0 0 2 0 2
Text 2 0 13 12 1 26
Total 0 13 22 1 28