Speaker variation in English prosodic boundary
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper analyses the rate of inter-speaker consistency in the way multiple speakers render prosodic events when they read the same scripts. Prosodically labeled data of five speakers from the Boston Radio Speech Corpus (BURSC) are used to measure the degree of speaker variation in rendering prosodic boundaries. The results indicate that the average rate of consistency on the presence or absence of boundary tones 89.71%. For the rate of consistency for the levels of boundary tones, an average consistency of 79.25% is achieved when three levels of category (i.e., ip, IP and no boundary) are compared in pairs of speakers. The rate is lowered to 76.74% when a comparison of prosodic strength is made after both speakers in a pair agreed that there are phrasal tones on aligned words. When a pair of speakers both have a prosodic boundary on a given word, the agreement rate on the type of phrasal tones is 50.95%. The rate of speakers' consistency in the presence of boundary tones is comparable to the rate of inter-transcriber reliability. The comparable rates with regard to locating prosodic boundaries in utterances by speakers and transcribers may be interpreted that the production and perception of prosodic phrasing are closely related to each other. The high rate of speakers' consistency is interpreted to be affected by syntactic structures, in spite of the lack of isomorphic relations between prosodic phrasing and syntactic phrasing.
Abstract
This paper analyses the rate of inter-speaker consistency in the way multiple speakers render prosodic events when they read the same scripts. Prosodically labeled data of five speakers from the Boston Radio Speech Corpus (BURSC) are used to measure the degree of speaker variation in rendering prosodic boundaries. The results indicate that the average rate of consistency on the presence or absence of boundary tones 89.71%. For the rate of consistency for the levels of boundary tones, an average consistency of 79.25% is achieved when three levels of category (i.e., ip, IP and no boundary) are compared in pairs of speakers. The rate is lowered to 76.74% when a comparison of prosodic strength is made after both speakers in a pair agreed that there are phrasal tones on aligned words. When a pair of speakers both have a prosodic boundary on a given word, the agreement rate on the type of phrasal tones is 50.95%. The rate of speakers' consistency in the presence of boundary tones is comparable to the rate of inter-transcriber reliability. The comparable rates with regard to locating prosodic boundaries in utterances by speakers and transcribers may be interpreted that the production and perception of prosodic phrasing are closely related to each other. The high rate of speakers' consistency is interpreted to be affected by syntactic structures, in spite of the lack of isomorphic relations between prosodic phrasing and syntactic phrasing.
참고문헌 (36)
- Bachenko, J., "A computational grammar of discourse-neutral prosodic phrasing in English", Computational Linguistics, 16, pp.155~170 (1990)
- Guidelines for ToBI labeling(version3. 0). Manuscript and accompanying speech materials, "Beckman, M.", The Ohio State University, ~ (1997)
- Black, A., "Assigning phrase breaks from part-of-speech sequences", In Proceedings of Eurospeech ’97, pp.995~998 (1997)
- Bod, R., "Probabilistic Linguistics" (2003), The MIT Press
- Breen, M., "Inter-transcriber reliability for two systems of prosodic annotation : ToBI(Tones and Break Indices)and RaP(Rhythm and Pitch)", Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8, pp.277~312 (2012)
- Brenier, M., "The detection of emphatic words using acoustic and lexical features", In Proceedings of Eurospeech, pp.3297~3300 (2005)
- A maximum-entropy-inspired parser, "Charniak, E.", Brown University, ~, pp.Brown University Technical Report CS99-12 (1999)
- Chomsky, N., "Syntactic Structures. The" (1957), Mouton
- Cohen, A., "A Survey of Machine Learning Methods for Predicting Prosody in Radio Speech", 석사, pp.2004
- Cole, J., "The role of syntactic structure in guiding prosody perception with spontaneous speech", Presented at Experimental and The Theoretical Approach to Prosody (ETAP) 2008, Ithaca, NewYork (2008), Cornell University
- Cooper, W., "Syntax and speech" (1980), Harvard University Press
- Cutler, A., "Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language : a literature review", Language and Speech, 40, pp.141~201 (1997)
- Dainora, A., "An empirically based probabilistic model of intonation in American English", 박사, pp.2001
- Dilley, L., "A comparison of in ter-transcriber reliability for two systems of prosodic annotation : RaP(Rhythm and Pitch)and ToBI(Tones and Break Indices)", In Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), pp.1619~1622 (2006)
- Grice, M., "Consistency in Transcription and Labelling of German Intonation with GToBI", In Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing(ICSLP), pp.1716~1719 (1996)
- Gut, U., "Measuring the reliability of manual annotations of speech corpora", In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conferenceon Speech Prosody, pp.565~568 (2004)
- Influence of syntax on prosodic boundary prediction, "Ingulfsen, T.", University of Cambridge, ~, pp.Technical Report 610 (2004)
- Jackendoff, R., "Foundations of Language : Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution" (2002), Oxford University Press
- Jun, S. -A., "Labeler Agreement in Transcribing Korean Intonation with K-ToBI", In Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), 3, pp.211~214 (2000)
- Ladd, D. R., "Intonational Phonology" (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Lyons, J., "Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics" (1968), Cambridge University Press
- Manning, C., "Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing" (1999), The MIT Press
- The Boston University Radio News Corpus, "Ostendorf, M.", Boston University, ~, pp.Technical Report ECS-95-001 (1995)
- Pitrelli, J., "Evaluation of prosodic transcription labeling reliability in the ToBI framework", Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, (, 123-126, Yo), pp.123~126 (1994)
- Price, P., "The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation", Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 90, pp.2956~2970 (1991)
- Ross, K., "Prediction of abstract prosodic labels for speech synthesis", Computer Speech and Language, 10, pp.155~185 (1996)
- Selkirk, E., "Phonology and Syntax" (1984), The MIT Press
- Silverman, K., "TOBI: a standard for labeling English prosody", Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP), pp.867~870 (1992)
- Sun, X., "Pitch accent prediction using ensemble machine learning", In Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing(ICSLP), pp.953~956 (2002)
- Syrdal, A., "Inter-transcriber reliability of ToBI prosodic labeling", In Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language (ICSLP), pp.235~238 (2000)
- Wang, M., "Automatic classification of intonational phrase Boundaries", Computer Speech and Language, 6, pp.175~196 (1992)
- Xu, Y., "Speech prosody: A methodological review", Journal of Speech Sciences, 1, pp.85~115 (2011)
- 윤태진, "Speaker Variation in Rendering English Prosodic Prominence", 영어영문학연구, 55(4), pp.465~481 (2013), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- Yoon, T., "A Predictive Modeling of Prosody through Grammatical Interface : A Computational Approach", 박사, pp.2007
- Yoon, T, "Intertranscriber reliability of prosodic labeling on telephone conversation using ToBI", ICSA International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Interspeech 2004, pp.2729~2732 (2004)
- Yuan, J., "Pitch accent prediction : Effects of genre and speaker", In Proceedings of Eurospeech, pp.1409~1412 (2005)