1)Highlighting of contrasts. This preference overrides all other tendencies to assign stress to a word or syllable.
The perhaps uniquely English-language tendency to deny a syllable its normal stressing in favour of another syllable not normally stressed but conveying or emphasising a contrast is very rarely revealed in the written language but an extremely rare example of doing so was to be seen in the Journals of Arnold Bennett (1954 p. 88) in which we find “I saw few signs ... of suppressed or expressed excitement...” where the writer conveys it by italicisation of a prefix.
Other examples include: Maˈjorities and ˋminorities. Midday is normally /mɪd`deɪ/ but midnight /ˋmɪdnaɪt/ yet either pattern is reversed if they occur in direct contrast.
A typical example of a usage in which a non-native speaker
of English may fail to observe the necessity of highlighting semantic
contrast occurs when a beginning like “In my `country...” is used.
2) The most powerful reason for denying stress to a word etc is the preference for: Avoidance of re-accenting of re-occurrences of words or even merely syllables which are identical or constitute or embody the same reference. A normally unstressable syllable would usually be stressed in citing eg the title of the journal ˈAlcohol and Alcohol`ism.
If a phrase etc doesn't exhibit these features, the default tendency for speakers is:
3) Rhythmic preference to stress the first and last suitable (ie more semantic'ly charged) words or syllables in any phrase or sentence.
They may prefer to avoid intermediate stresses either depending on how rapid they want to make the utterance or in compliance with the rhythmic PREFERENCE for STRESS ALTERNATION as in 'Let me have a bit of something to `eat or 'Let me 'have a bit of 'something to `eat in which (i) all potential stresses between the first and last words are suppressed and (ii) the potential stress on bit is suppressed. See also Section 4 Item 7 where at Prepositions and Honorifics other examples are given of Alternate Stress Preference.
4) The preference for an earliest or earliest-and-latest stressing pattern one may call unifying or globalising, or simply global, stress distribution.
At the word level this globalising tendency shows as the inclination to give front stress to polysyllables and compound words.
At the phrase level, English-speakers much more frequently prefer:
5) Analytical stress distribution
with its regular suppression of stresses on anaphoric expressions such as initial articles eg this and final enclitic pronouns eg it.
One of the most striking examples in which English speakers all depart from their customary analytical approach to take the unusual step of treating globally a very common expression is 'Mind your own `business. (Contrast the more normally accented synonymous 'Pay attention to your `own affairs and That's `my business.) It's particularly remarkable because the more logical alternative stressing *Mind your `own business can be said to be so unusual as to be virtually non-existent. This is not true of similar expressions like It's none of our `business which, however, can alternate with the more predictable stressing at least if it's softened by use of a falling-rising tone viz It's `none of `our ˏbusiness.
Another example of globalising rather than analysing is ˈQuote unˋquote to introduce a quotation.
In the special context of an "insistent" rising head before a falling climax tone the contrastive stress habit may be counteracted eg (i) ˏPay atˏtention ˏto yourˏown af ˋfairs. (ii) It says ˏsmoking or ˏnon ˋsmoking.
Many expressions are just as likely to occur in either the globalising or the analytic form eg the ˈbest of ˈboth `worlds or the ˈbest of `both worlds. Cf also I ˈdon't see it in `that ˏlight and I ˈdon't see it in that `light. The preference in such cases may be due not to the avoidance of re-stressing a word or synonym for a word but simply that an idea is present in the consciousness of the speaker. This can occur for example when a co-locutor has seemed to have treated a subject with inadequate seriousness though no actual joke has been made the speaker may more likely say It's no joking `matter as the less English-specific type of stressing It's `no `joking ˏmatter. The same type of explanation applies to expressions like There's ˈno doubt a`bout it which might be said when the speaker is only presuming incredulousness on the part of the co-locutor.
6) The world's languages range between the two extremes of greatly preferring global rhythmic structures eg French and Spanish and favouring almost exclusively analytical structures eg English and German. Most languages seem to fall somewhere in between these two extremes.
7) It must be remembered that these are only strong tendencies which in practice may be forsaken by the individual speaker for a variety of reasons some of which it is impossible to discover eg notably when they reflect what is going on in the speaker's mind but is undeclared. Departures from the usual practice amount to perhaps something like ten percent of utterances for most speakers of English. Anyone who listens out for such departures will be almost certain to hear a number of them during the course of a day spent listening to a variety of conversations, broadcast speech etc.
8) Another of the reasons for the departures may be that the speaker has simply been subject to what, in regard to non-prosodic features of speech, would simply be termed a slip of the tongue. A peculiarity of speakers’ treatment of such prosodic “mistakes” is that, unlike the way people treat mistakes of articulation, which are very often corrected by the speaker, it is only very rarely indeed that one hears a repetition that amends the prosody of an utterance just made. After all, there is no recognised way in writing of correcting any aspect of prosody other than word stressing by underlining, italicising or capitalising the word in question. Any purely pitch-pattern errors can hardly be represented in normal writing at all. It's noteworthy also that people are completely untroubled by having various prosodic features removed or even replaced by something linguistically quite inappropriate when they hear the words of a song.
9) Another factor one must bear in mind is that by temperament one individual may be far more heedless than another about prosodies in ordinary situations. In circumstances where the speakers wish to speed up or slow down or are influenced by distracting contexts or by circumstances such as alcohol consumption the tendency to depart from their normal prosodic practice is increased perhaps by partly “losing the thread” of what they wish to say.
10) Animation Stresses. Certain stresses people use from time to time may seem to be intended as inappropriate ways of highlighting individual words when that is not the purpose for which the speaker has adopted the stressing but rather as a device for increasing the intensity of a whole expression (phrase, sentence etc). I long ago proposed for such usages the term "animation stresses". At the word level, anomalous stresses that might be termed "prosodic slang" are used by many speakers on eg bra`vo, ra`ther etc and by children at public schools saying ca`ve. Compare also the American usage posi`tively. It's possible for an "empty" word like thing or matter to be accented merely to amplify the force of a sentence eg in It's ˏnot a ˏgood `thing. A strong indication that the speaker is not truly accenting a word in the normal sense of accentuation occurs when a word like it which can safely be said to never be accented in a non-contrastive context is given a major stress as in `It's all ˏright. [See also my blog of 17 June 07.]
11) One should remember that persons reading aloud or acting, and thus using not their own spontaneous choices but prescribed wording, are very prone to prosodic mistakes – the more so the less their performance has been prepared. I've been shocked on many occasions to observe that the director of a play or film has allowed a performer to employ a completely inappropriate prosody. I can’t remember any occasion when anyone has ever indicated to me that they received such a shock. For such a very rare phenomenon as a writer referring to such a matter we have to turn again to the Journals of Arnold Bennett (1954 p. 215 ed. F. Swinnerton) where he mentioned of a “Troupe of about 40” that “Not one could avoid the most elementary false emphasis. Thus Sylvia May looking at a man asleep on sofa, 'But he may wake up' (when there was no question of another man asleep) instead of 'He may wake up' ”. Bennett was a playwright and director of his own plays. Among very numerous examples one might give of actors' obvious inappropriate stressings there is, from the Orson Welles film of Othello, the unfortunate “She might ˈlie by an ˈemperor's ˎside”.12) It's possible for a word to be accented twice in a sentence because of semantic re-focusing eg because a contrast of meaning is involved when it reoccurs in a different sense (at one time called ‘anta`naclasis’), as in the following:
(i) If you `want to make good `ˏcoffee,| you must use plenty of `coffee.(The first “coffee” is the beverage, the second the beans or powder.)
(ii) There are `ˏpalaces | and ´`palaces. (ie ordinary ones & specially fine ones.)
(iii) It's not what she ˋˏsaid | it was the way she ˊˋsaid it.The first said refers to the words used, the second to to the manner of their delivery.
(iv) 'Boys 'will be ˋboys. (ie young men inevitably exhibit the behaviour of immature males)
(v) 'Tolerance | is what 'makes 'Britain ˋBritain. (ie makes the country the kind of country it is) Tony Blair (December 2006)
(vi) "Making the unˋˏmissable|unˋmissable." BBC catchphrase in advertising their postponed-listening facility by which a broadcast that has not been able to be received at its original transmission time may be received by computer at a time chosen by the user during the following week. (2008)
(vii) Robert Burns referred to ˈman's inhuˈmanity to ˋman (people's cruelty to their fellow human beings)
(viii) See also People Speaking 4.1.2 line 5 where 'Who was that lady I saw you with last night?' receives the reply 'That was no lady. That was my wife' This very old joke turns on semantic re-focusing. The sense of lady intended by the first speaker is merely 'woman', but the sense it’s taken to have is 'woman of refinement'.
(ix) A ˈdog ˈdoesn't eat ˋ ˏdog (=dogs aren't cannibals)
which correlates with ˈDog eat ˋdog to describe competition that is as extreme as cannibalism.
Note also: An ˈeye for an ˏeye |and a ˈtooth for a ˋtooth. A bargain is a bargain (well-known proverbs etc).
Kinds of re-focusing etc can probably explain most of the following also: Let ˈbygones be `bygones. People said it wouldn't sur`vive but sur`vive it ˋ ˏhas. If the ˈworst ˈcomes to the ˋ ˏworst... ˈBusiness is ˋbusiness. `Amy,| being `ˏAmy | wouldn't a`gree. The ˋonly thing we have to ˏ fear is ˈfear itˋself.
A pair of usually accented items occurs in the common saying A `place for ˏeverything | and ˈeverything in its ˋplace (which can be but usually isn't accented as A `place for ˏeverything | and ˈeverything ˋin its place).
It's also possible for words to be accented on immediate re-use in certain other similar situations such as when a speaker “echoes” another’s words nominally at least for confirmation, as in the following.I want some `money. – `You’re asking `me for ´money? (You must be `mad. `I’m a `pauper. `ˏYou,| are `rich.)
13) (i) Another type of re-accentuation within the same phrase may occur when a word is repeated immediately for emphasis eg: it's a big big job, very very nice, a long long time, a lovely lovely day, a red red rose, never never say that, the old old story, it’s really really beautiful, dear dear (me) etc.
(ii) Where a word is separated from its repetition by only a particle, the word is regularly accented on its second occurrence. Examples include: again and again, for ever and ever, an eye for an eye, arm in arm, back to back, blow by blow, day by day, face to face., from ear to ear, from strength to strength, heart of hearts, home from home, hope against hope, inch by inch, more and more, neck and neck, night after night, on and on, from time to time, wheels within wheels (also possibly ˈwheels with`in wheels). Note also expressions like She ˈkeeps herself to her`self.
In Parliament on 12 June 1990 MP Gerald Kaufman said "The Government ... is isolated on |ˈissue| after ˈissue | after ˎissue."
14) Although these "analytical" sentence stressing tendencies observable in English-speakers are very strong and may in some cases make a listener uncomfortable about what was a speaker’s precise meaning or whether a speaker has succeeded in expressing their meaning properly etc, in regard to these “rules”, which as we say, can be heard to be broken every day, EFL teachers need not concern themselves unduly if they find themselves baffled in their natural desire to understand what brought about such infringements. On the other hand they should not neglect to inform their more advanced students of the spoken language of the existence of these overwhelmingly often firmly followed patterns of behaviour to be found in all the principle varieties of spoken English employed by educated users.
15) Finally, there are plenty of expressions in English that contain accentuations which can hardly be explained on logical principles – what we are obliged to term as accentuation (or simply stress) idioms. Among the many examples one could quote are the following: It’s none of your `business, That’s all there is `to it, Think nothing `of it etc. These are only in a limited sense idioms because they can usually be attributed to the speaker’s reacting not to a verbal formulation by the interlocutor but to something that the speaker perceives as indicated or adumbrated by the other person. The word doubt may not have been used by a speaker but what has been sed may be taken as expressing dou't in our example above. As we've said, a speaker may avoid accentuation of the word laugh not because that word has occurred in the exchange but because the interlocutor has laughed or even smiled (with exaggeration by the speaker) eg in the sentence It’s ˈno laughing `matter. There are some other cases for which it's difficult to perceive a logical explanation. For example, despite the usual powerful feeling the speaker has that a contrast must be highlighted it is still idiomatic to stress eyes in the back of one's `head with no stress on back. As far as the EFL user is concerned, it's advisable not to worry about such items but at least to take them to be idioms. Getting them "wrong" is in any case usually of very little consequence.