Purpose: This study examined how speakers adapt to fundamental frequency (f[subscript o]) errors that affect the use of prosody to convey linguistic meaning, whether f[subscript o] adaptation in that context relates to adaptation in linguistically neutral sustained vowels, and whether cue trading is reflected in responses in the prosodic cues of f[subscript o] and amplitude. Method: Twenty-four speakers said vowels and sentences while f[subscript o] was digitally altered to induce predictable errors. Shifts in f[subscript o] (±200 cents) were applied to the entire sustained vowel and one word (emphasized or unemphasized) in sentences. Two prosodic cues--f[subscript o] and amplitude--were extracted. The effects of f[subscript o] shifts, shift direction, and emphasis on f[subscript o] response magnitude were evaluated with repeated-measures analyses of variance. Relationships between adaptive f[subscript o] responses in sentences and vowels and between adaptive f[subscript o] and amplitude responses were evaluated with Spearman correlations. Results: Speakers adapted to f[subscript o] errors in both linguistically meaningful sentences and linguistically neutral vowels. Adaptive f[subscript o] responses of unemphasized words were smaller than those of emphasized words when f[subscript o] was shifted upward. There was no relationship between adaptive f[subscript o] responses in vowels and emphasized words, but adaptive f[subscript o] and amplitude responses were strongly, positively correlated. Conclusions: Sensorimotor adaptation occurs in response to f[subscript o] errors regardless of how disruptive the error is to linguistic meaning. Adaptation to f[subscript o] errors during sustained vowels may not involve the exact same mechanisms as sensorimotor adaptation as it occurs in meaningful speech. The relationship between adaptive responses in f[subscript o] and amplitude supports an integrated model of prosody.