This dissertation aims to extend our knowledge of prosody--in particular, what kinds of information may be conveyed through prosody, which prosodic dimensions may be used to convey them, and how individual speakers differ from one another in how they use prosody. Four production studies were conducted to examine how various factors interact with one another in shaping the prosody of an utterance and how prosody fulfills its multi-functional role. Experiment 1 explores the interaction between two types of informativity, namely "information structure" and "information-theoretic properties." The results show that the prosodic consequences of new-information focus are modulated by the focused word's frequency, whereas the prosodic consequences of corrective focus are modulated by the focused word's probability in the context. Furthermore, f0 ranges appear to be more informative than f0 shapes in reflecting informativity across speakers. Specifically, speakers seem to have individual "preferences" regarding f0 shapes, the f0 ranges they use for an utterance, and the magnitude of differences in f0 ranges by which they mark information-structural distinctions. In contrast, there is more cross-speaker validity in the actual directions of differences in f0 ranges between information-structural types. Experiments 2 and 3 further show that the interaction found between corrective focus and contextual probability depends on the "interlocutor's knowledge state." "When the interlocutor has no access to the crucial information concerning utterances' contextual probability," speakers prosodically emphasize contextually improbable corrections, but not contextually probable corrections. Furthermore, speakers prosodically emphasize the corrections in response to contextually probable misstatements, but not the corrections in response to contextually improbable misstatements. In contrast, completely opposite patterns are found when words' contextual probability is shared knowledge between the speaker and the interlocutor: speakers prosodically emphasize contextually probable corrections and the corrections in response to contextually improbable misstatements. Experiment 4 demonstrates the multi-functionality of prosody by investigating its discourse-level functions in Mandarin Chinese, a tone language where a word's prosodic patterns is crucial to its meaning. The results show that, although prosody serves fundamental, lexical-level functions in Mandarin Chinese, it nevertheless provides cues to information structure as well. Similar to what has been found with English, corrective information is prosodically more prominent than non-corrective information, and new information is prosodically more prominent than given information. Taken together, these experiments demonstrate the complex relationship between prosody and the different types of information it encodes in a given language. To better understand prosody, it is important to integrate insights from different traditions of research and to investigate across languages. In addition, the findings of this research suggest that speakers' assumptions about what their interlocutors know--as well as speakers' ability to update these expectations--play a key role in shaping the prosody of utterances. I hypothesize that prosodic prominence may reflect the gap between what speakers had expected their interlocutors to say and what their interlocutors have actually said. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]