This paper examines the phonetics and phonology of intonational boundaries in five Romance languages/varieties. A typology of the boundary cues used is given, as well as their relative frequency. The phonology of the tonal boundary gesture is described by means of the inventory of nuclear accents used plus their possible combinations with the two dominant end contours: continuation rise (H) and sustained pitch (!H). A detailed analysis of the phonetics of the H boundary tone, which is the main boundary cue observed across these languages, is provided. This involved assessing the impact on H scaling of nuclear accent choice, phrase length and first peak height. Overall, it is shown that the variation found consistently groups these languages in two sets: the Catalan-Spanish group and the Italian-European Portuguese group.

This chapter describes the nuclear contours and intonational phrasing patterns of the most common sentence types across varieties of Portuguese. The resulting prosodic analysis is the first contribution to a Portuguese_ToBI proposal that offers a comparative description of four Brazilian Portuguese varieties—Baiano, Mineiro, and the Southeast and South areas of Sulista—and four European Portuguese varieties—Standard European Portuguese, Oporto, Alentejo, and Algarve—with the goal of providing a useful foundation for further systematic studies of Portuguese prosody. The analysis is based on data from the Interactive Atlas of the Prosody of Portuguese. Differences in the intonation of narrow-focus statements, commands, and requests, as well as in the distribution of pitch accents, were found to distinguish Brazilian and European Portuguese. The chapter concludes with an overview of the intonational system of Portuguese and its similarities and differences compared with other Romance languages.

Production studies of the intonational signalling of focus in European Portuguese (EP) have shown that focus is expressed by a specific pitch accent type, thus revealing a systematic contrast between nuclear accents associated with different meanings. In declarative utterances, the contrast between the neutral/broad focus reading and the narrow/contrastive focus reading is essentially realized as an alignment difference: H+L* (neutral accent) and H*+L (focus accent). A pilot perceptual study using natural stimuli has shown that subjects are able to distinguish between members of neutral/focus minimal pairs and to match them to the appropriate production context. However, the perception of the contrast found in production has not yet been investigated in detail. The present paper revisits the production contrast and investigates its categorical nature using a multiple methodology approach that resorts to semantically motivated tasks. Several experiments tested whether differences in F0 peak and valley alignment would trigger a perceptual change from one meaning to the other, and whether the alignment differences pattern alike in stimuli based on a neutral and a focus sentence. In Experiment 1, stimuli were classified in a context-matching identification task. In Experiment 2, participants rated appropriateness of stimulus to context in a semantic scaling task. Finally, in Experiment 3, pairs of stimuli were discriminated in a context-matching discrimination task. The results of the three experiments provide converging evidence for the distinction between H+L* and H*+L. Moreover, they support the claim that the neutral/focus accent distinction is primarily an alignment contrast phonologically encoded at the pitch accent level. These findings have implications for the understanding of the nature of intonational contrasts, and the discussion about the approaches and methods to define prosodic categories.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio