Rhythm, metrics, and the link to phonology

![CDATA[Since Ramus et al. (1999) a number of statistical metrics have been routinely employed by researchers (Ramus 2003, Grabe & Low 2002 etc.) in an effort to rhythmically classify languages. However, recent studies by Arvaniti (2009), Tilsen & Arvaniti (2013), Arvaniti & Rodriquez (2013) etc., have challenged both the validity of these metrics in reflecting speech rhythm, and the physical measurability of rhythm itself. The present study takes a comparative evaluative approach, and explores the applicability of the proposed metrics to a Papuan language (Urama) with a phonology quite different than traditional Western European (W.E.) languages. It is argued here that the statistical underpinning of the existing rhythm metrics is a direct outcome of an overt effort to capture the temporal durational characteristics of the phonotactics of W.E. languages. As such, these metrics are only capable of providing a crude measure of timing.]]