On Modelling Glottal Stop in Czech Text-To-Speech Synthesis*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
How to Edit IPA 1 How to Use SAMPA for Editing IPA 2 How to Use X
version July 19 How to edit IPA When you want to enter the International Phonetic Association (IPA) character set with a computer keyboard, you need to know how to enter each IPA character with a sequence of keyboard strokes. This document describes a number of techniques. The complete SAMPA and RTR mapping can be found in the attached html documents. The main html document (ipa96.html) comes in a pdf-version (ipa96.pdf) too. 1 How to use SAMPA for editing IPA The Speech Assessment Method (SAM) Phonetic Alphabet has been developed by John Wells (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa). The goal was to map 176 IPA characters into the range of 7-bit ASCII, which is a set of 96 characters. The principle is to represent a single IPA character by a single ASCII character. This table is an example for five vowels: Description IPA SAMPA script a ɑ A ae ligature æ { turned a ɐ 6 epsilon ɛ E schwa ə @ A visual represenation of a keyboard shows the mapping on screen. The source for the SAMPA mapping used is "Handbook of multimodal an spoken dialogue systems", D Gibbon, Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000. 2 How to use X-SAMPA for editing IPA The multi-character extension to SAMPA has also been developed by John Wells (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/x-sampa.htm). The basic principle used is to form chains of ASCII characters, that represent a single IPA character, e.g. This table lists some examples Description IPA X-SAMPA beta β B small capital B ʙ B\ lower-case B b b lower-case P p p Phi ɸ p\ The X-SAMPA mapping is in preparation and will be included in the next release. -
Building a Universal Phonetic Model for Zero-Resource Languages
Building a Universal Phonetic Model for Zero-Resource Languages Paul Moore MInf Project (Part 2) Interim Report Master of Informatics School of Informatics University of Edinburgh 2020 3 Abstract Being able to predict phones from speech is a challenge in and of itself, but what about unseen phones from different languages? In this project, work was done towards building precisely this kind of universal phonetic model. Using the GlobalPhone language corpus, phones’ articulatory features, a recurrent neu- ral network, open-source libraries, and an innovative prediction system, a model was created to predict phones based on their features alone. The results show promise, especially for using these models on languages within the same family. 4 Acknowledgements Once again, a huge thank you to Steve Renals, my supervisor, for all his assistance. I greatly appreciated his practical advice and reasoning when I got stuck, or things seemed overwhelming, and I’m very thankful that he endorsed this project. I’m immensely grateful for the support my family and friends have provided in the good times and bad throughout my studies at university. A big shout-out to my flatmates Hamish, Mark, Stephen and Iain for the fun and laugh- ter they contributed this year. I’m especially grateful to Hamish for being around dur- ing the isolation from Coronavirus and for helping me out in so many practical ways when I needed time to work on this project. Lastly, I wish to thank Jesus Christ, my Saviour and my Lord, who keeps all these things in their proper perspective, and gives me strength each day. -
Equivalences Between Different Phonetic Alphabets
Equivalences between different phonetic alphabets by Carlos Daniel Hern´andezMena Description IPA Mexbet X-SAMPA IPA Symbol in LATEX Voiceless bilabial plosive p p p p Voiceless dental plosive” t t t d ntextsubbridgeftg Voiceless velar plosive k k k k Voiceless palatalized plosive kj k j k j kntextsuperscriptfjg Voiced bilabial plosive b b b b Voiced bilabial approximant B VB o ntextloweringfntextbetag fl Voiced dental plosive d” d d d ntextsubbridgefdg Voiced dental fricative flD DD o ntextloweringfntextipafn;Dgg Voiced velar plosive g g g g Voiced velar fricative Èfl GG o ntextloweringfntextbabygammag Voiceless palato-alveolar affricate t“S tS tS ntextroundcapftntexteshg Voiceless labiodental fricative f f f f Voiceless alveolar fricative s s s s Voiced alveolar fricative z z z z Voiceless dental fricative” s s [ s d ntextsubbridgefsg Voiced dental fricative” z z [ z d ntextsubbridgefzg Voiceless postalveolar fricative S SS ntextesh Voiceless velar fricative x x x x Voiced palatal fricative J Z jn ntextctj Voiced postalveolar affricate d“Z dZ dZ ntextroundcapfdntextyoghg Voiced bilabial nasal m m m m Voiced alveolar nasal n n n n Voiced labiodental nasal M MF ntextltailm Voiced dental nasal n” n [ n d ntextsubbridgefng Voiced palatalized nasal nj n j n j nntextsuperscriptfjg Voiced velarized nasal nÈ N n G nntextsuperscript fntextbabygammag Voiced palatal nasal ñ n∼ J ntextltailn Voiced alveolar lateral approximant l l l l Voiced dental lateral” l l [ l d ntextsubbridgeflg Voiced palatalized lateral lj l j l j lntextsuperscriptfjg Lowered -
Icelandic Phonetic Transcription
A Short Overview of the Icelandic Sound System Pronunciation Variants and Phonetic Transcription IPA Version Eiríkur Rögnvaldsson SÍM 2020 This document was written in December 2019 and January 2020 for the SÍM consortium as a part of the Icelandic National Language Technology Program. The document is made in two versions – one using the IPA transcription system and the other using the X-SAMPA transcription system. This is the IPA version. Both versions begin with a table showing the mappings between the two systems. The document is distributed under the CC BY 4.0 license. 2 1 An Overview of the Icelandic Sound System Icelandic speech sounds can be divided into two main groups; consonants and vowels. Icelandic consonants can be further divided into four classes: plosives (stops), fricatives (and approximants), nasals, and liquids (laterals and trills/taps). Within the vowel group, a further distinction can be made between monophthongs and diphthongs. The following table gives an overview of the phonemes of the Icelandic IPA and X- SAMPA symbol set, grouped by the phoneme classes to which they belong (according to the manner of their articulation). Consonants IPA SAMPA Orthography IPA SAMPA Gloss Plosives p p bera [pɛːra] /pE:ra/ ‘carry’ pʰ p_h pera [pʰɛːra] /p_hE:ra/ ‘pear’ t t dalur [taːlʏr] /ta:lYr/ ‘valley’ tʰ t_h tala [tʰaːla] /t_ha:la/ ‘talk’ c c gera [cɛːra] /cE:ra/ ‘do’ cʰ c_h kæla [cʰaiːla] /c_hai:la/ ‘cool off’ k k galdur [kaltʏr] /kaltYr/ ‘magic’ kʰ k_h kaldur [kʰaltʏr] /k_haltYr/ ‘cold’ Fricatives v v vera [vɛːra] /vE:ra/ ‘be’ -
Introductory Materials Akan Twi Asante 1
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Sprach- und literaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät Institut für deutsche Sprache und Linguistik MA Historische Linguistik Modul 9: Methoden Linguistischer Datenerhebung Urbane Feldforschung Sommersemester 2018 Dozent: PD Dr. habil. Frank Seifart Verfasserin: Polina Zabolotskikh Matrikelnummer: 595976 Introductory Materials Akan Twi Asante 1. Bibliographical survey This paper is dedicated to the dialect Asante of Akan Twi, one of languages of West Africa. The topic of this small research is usage of phrasal verbs (emu) ye den, (emu) ye duru and (emu) ye hare, which is described in the grammar outlook, written by J. G. Christaller in 1875 and called Grammar of the Asante and Fante Language called Tschi [Chwee, Twi]. This is a brief grammar outlook, describing all main phonetic, morphologic and syntactic aspects of Akan Twi. There is a lack of fundamental linguistic studies of Akan Twi, the majority of the works are either general essays or textbooks for school students, what means there are mostly works one can consult only on basic patterns of verbal conjunction and noun inflection in Akan and its dialects. The ones, used used while writing this paper are: Asante-Twi learners' reference grammar written by David Adu-Amankwah in 2003 and A Comprehensive Course in Twi (Asante) by Florence A. Dolphyne, published in 1996 as well as the Twi, basic course written by James E Redden, and Nana Owusu, issued in 1963. Unfortunately there are only a few references to the dialectal differences between Akan dialects in the mentioned general works, but there is a lack of a thorough research on this topic. -
1/2 SAMPA Symbol IPA Equivalent Description # Pause { [Æ] Open Lax
SAMPA-IPA equivalences University of Toronto Romance Phonetics Database SAMPA Symbol IPA Equivalent Description # Pause { [æ] Open lax front vowel @ [ə] Mid central unrounded vowel 1 [ɨ] Close central unrounded vowel 2 [ø] Close-mid front rounded vowel 3 [ɜ] Open-mid central unrounded vowel 6 [ɐ] Open central vowel 6~ [ɐ̃] Open central nasal vowel 9 [œ] Open-mid front rounded vowel 9~ [œ̃] Open-mid front rounded nasal vowel a [a] Open front unrounded vowel a~ [ã] Open front unrounded nasal vowel aj [aj] Open front diphthong aw [aw] Open front diphthong A [ɑ] Open back unrounded vowel b [b] Voiced bilabial stop b: [bː] Geminate voiced bilabial stop d [d] Voiced dental/alveolar stop d: [dː] Geminate voiced dental/alveolar stop D [ð] Voiced interdental fricative dz [dz] Voiced alveolar affricate dz: [dzː] Geminated voiced alveolar affricate dZ [dʒ] Voiced post-alveolar affricate dZ: [dʒː] Geminate Voiced post-alveolar affricate e [e] Close-mid front unrounded vowel e~ [ẽ] Close-mid front nasal unrounded vowel e_X [e̯] Non-syllabic tense mid front vowel ej [ej] Mid front diphthong E [ɛ] Open-mid front unrounded vowel E~ [ɛ̃] Open-mid front unrounded nasal vowel f [f] Voiceless labio-dental fricative g [ɡ] Voiced velar stop g: [ɡː] Geminate voiced velar stop h [h] Voiceless glottal fricative H [ɥ] Rounded palatal glide i [i] Close front unrounded vowel i~ [i]̃ Unrounded tense high front nasal vowel I [ɪ] Close front lax vowel j [j] Unrounded palatal glide jj [ʝ] Voiced palatal fricative 1/2 SAMPA-IPA equivalences University of Toronto Romance -
Computer-Coding the IPA: a Proposed Extension of SAMPA J.C.Wells, University College London
Computer-coding the IPA: a proposed extension of SAMPA J.C.Wells, University College London 1. Computer coding. When an ASCII file (a DOS text file) is sent as an e-mail message, the only characters that are sure to be properly transmitted are those with ASCII/ANSI numbers between 32 and 126. These comprise upper-case A..Z, lower-case a..z, numerals 0..9, punctuation marks ! " ' ( ) , - . / : ; ? [ ] { }, other marks # $ % & * + < = > @ \ ^ _ ` | ~, and space. If we want to transmit phonetic symbols, we must therefore recode them using only these characters. It is not even the case that all the 'other marks' mentioned will necessarily reappear correctly at the receiving end: on my own British screen, for example, an incoming character originally transmitted as a hash mark (#) appears as pound sterling (£). But at least there is a consistent one- for-one substitution, so that information is not lost. On the other hand an outgoing character falling outside the range 32..126 is very likely to be converted into something else: a pound sterling sign (£, ASCII 156, ANSI 0163) transmitted from a British keyboard may be received (even in the UK) as an exclamation mark (!), hash (#), or other substitute. 2. The SAM Phonetic Alphabet (SAMPA) conventions were drawn up in 1988-1991 (with subsequent minor revisions and extensions) by the SAM (Speech Assessment Methods) consortium, comprising speech scientists from nine countries of the European Community (Wells et al, 1992). The purpose of SAMPA was to form the basis of an international standard machine-readable phonetic alphabet for purposes of international collaboration in speech research. -
The Unicode Cookbook for Linguists
The Unicode Cookbook for Linguists Managing writing systems using orthography profiles Steven Moran Michael Cysouw language Translation and Multilingual Natural science press Language Processing 10 Translation and Multilingual Natural Language Processing Editors: Oliver Czulo (Universität Leipzig), Silvia Hansen-Schirra (Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz), Reinhard Rapp (Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz) In this series: 1. Fantinuoli, Claudio & Federico Zanettin (eds.). New directions in corpus-based translation studies. 2. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia & Sambor Grucza (eds.). Eyetracking and Applied Linguistics. 3. Neumann, Stella, Oliver Čulo & Silvia Hansen-Schirra (eds.). Annotation, exploitation and evaluation of parallel corpora: TC3 I. 4. Czulo, Oliver & Silvia Hansen-Schirra (eds.). Crossroads between Contrastive Linguistics, Translation Studies and Machine Translation: TC3 II. 5. Rehm, Georg, Felix Sasaki, Daniel Stein & Andreas Witt (eds.). Language technologies for a multilingual Europe: TC3 III. 6. Menzel, Katrin, Ekaterina Lapshinova-Koltunski & Kerstin Anna Kunz (eds.). New perspectives on cohesion and coherence: Implications for translation. 7. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, Oliver Czulo & Sascha Hofmann (eds). Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting. 8. Svoboda, Tomáš, Łucja Biel & Krzysztof Łoboda (eds.). Quality aspects in institutional translation. 9. Fox, Wendy. Can integrated titles improve the viewing experience? Investigating the impact of subtitling on the reception and enjoyment of film using eye tracking and questionnaire data. 10. Moran, Steven & Michael Cysouw. The Unicode cookbook for linguists: Managing writing systems using orthography profiles ISSN: 2364-8899 The Unicode Cookbook for Linguists Managing writing systems using orthography profiles Steven Moran Michael Cysouw language science press Steven Moran & Michael Cysouw. 2018. The Unicode Cookbook for Linguists: Managing writing systems using orthography profiles (Translation and Multilingual Natural Language Processing 10). -
QWERTY DB (Version 0.8) a Multilingual Unicode Keyboard
QWERTY DB (version 0.8) A multilingual Unicode keyboard This keyboard layout is loosely based on the US International keyboard. It preserves all the key combinations of a standard US or UK keyboard. (The only difference between the US and the UK keyboard is the placement of " and @; however, " should hardly be needed anymore with this keyboard because you can directly enter “ and ” instead.) However, it offers a great variety of additional possibilities: 1. Better typography Key combination Comment Shift + AltGr + N → – dash, (U+2013, so-called “n-dash”) Shift + AltGr + M → — long dash (U+2014, so-called “m-dash”) Shift + AltGr + B → — typographically correct long dash with hair spaces before and after (U+ 200A, U+2014, U+200A) Shift + AltGr + ] → − minus sign (U+2212; you will never need to use the hyphen for this again: “7 + 8 − 3 = 12”, not “7 + 8 - 3 = 12”) AltGr + - → ‑ no-break space (U+2011), prevents word division and is not only independent of the software used but also behaves much better than the special character in Word Shift + AltGr + - → (SHY) soft hyphen (U+00AD), enables you to enter optional word breaks even outside text processors AltGr + J → (ZWJ) zero-width joiner (U+200D), can form ligatures in certain contexts Shift + AltGr + J → (ZWNJ) zero-width non-joiner (U+200C), can prevent the formation of ligatures in certain contexts AltGr + space → no-break space (U+00A0), prevents a line break (and with justified alignment usually also (NBSP) preserves the width of the space from being changed) Shift + space → narrow no-break space (U+202F) for arranging numbers, e.g. -
Deciphering the Dolphin Language Appendix U 1
Deciphering the Dolphin Language Appendix U 1 by James T. Fulton U.1 Introduction 1 The goal of this appendix is to report the evidence related to the eternal question of whether the dolphin, and 2 particularly the bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus, unless otherwise indicated, employs what is traditionally 3 described as language in English. If it logically does, the secondary goal is to define the next steps in deciphering 4 that language. 5 This appendix is subsidiary to “Hearing: A 21st Century Paradigm” and the website Processes in Biological Hearing. 6 There is a limitation in the vocabulary used in the linguistic community revolving around the multiple uses of the 7 word language. This work will separate the word language used as a noun and the word language used as an 8 adjective. As an adjective, it will be used to delineate a language protocol (neural software) that is coupled with a 9 vocalization capability (physiological hardware or plant) that together support language (used as a noun) to describe 10 both intraspecies communications and interspecies communications (under more complex conditions). 11 - - - - 12 Human academicians of one linguistic school have long argued that only humans employ language; all lower 13 animals only communicate. In a 1980 text2, Herman & Tavolga (Chap. 4) reviewed the literature of this linguistic 14 school from the communications perspective and Herman (Chap. 8) reviewed the similar literature related to the 15 cognitive capabilities of the dolphin. Herman noted (page 409), “The recent demonstration s of language-learning 16 capabilities in Pongidae (with a string of citations and using 1980 cladogram) reveal that most and possibly all of the 17 design features of human language are present in the learned linguistic transactions of the apes. -
Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Lao As Spoken In
Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Lao as Spoken in Laos 1. Dialects There are several dialects identified in Lao. The number varies according to sources, ranging from three to six. The dialects of Lao have been principally defined in terms of tones, including number of tones, pitch levels and contours and vocabularies (cf. Suzuki, 2004; Person, 1998. Although different dialects are said to be mutually intelligible, spoken Lao displays considerable variation between the dialects. There are marked differences in pronunciations and/or tones as well as substantial differences in regular vocabularies, and subtle idiomatic and grammatical differences (Enfield, 2007, p. 19; Suzuki, 2004)1. Among the dialects, North, Vientiane and South dialects are often described as major dialects; there is little documentation on Northeastern and Central dialects. Vientiane and North dialects, although geographically closely situated, exhibit distinctive characteristics in their tonal structures, pitch contours, and pronunciations (Enfield, 2007). For example, there are two vowel letters (e.g. ໃ vs. ໄ) that are pronounced the same in Vientiane dialect but pronounced differently in Luangprabang. In other cases, when speakers of different dialects pronounce certain words differently, they may also spell the words differently. Region Districts or Cities Vientiane Vientiane, Vientiane Municipality Xaignabouli, Bokeo, Oudomxai, Phongsali, Luangnamtha, Northern Luangphabang Northeastern Xiangkhouang, Houaphan Central Khammouan, Bolikhamxai Southern Champasak, Savannakhet, Salavan, Attapu, Xekong2 The dialect spoken in the capital city Vientiane and surrounding central districts is the most widely understood and is generally regarded as the unofficial spoken standard. Standard written Lao is based on Vientiane Lao. Taking into consideration the populations of dialect speakers and dialectal variations, both spoken and written, we propose to collect the Vientiane dialect for the speech database. -
Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Georgian As Spoken in Georgia 1. Special Handling of Dialects
Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Georgian as Spoken in Georgia Georgian is a Kartvelian language, spoken in Georgia in the Caucasus. It is spoken by approximately 4 million speakers. 1. Special handling of dialects Georgian is commonly split into two major regional dialect groups – eastern and western (ARMAZI, 2002). These groups can be further divided into 14 separate dialects spoken in Georgia as shown in the table below, although the distinction between them is often restricted to lexical choices (Gigineishvili et al., 1961). Region Dialects Javakhian, Kartlian, Meskhian, Kakhetian, Khevsurian, Eastern Mokhevian, Kizlar-Mozdokian, Pshavian, Tushetian Western Imeretian, Lechkhumian, Rachan, Adjarian, Gurian Gigineishvili et al. (1961) uses five dialect groups instead of the broader two-group split. This grouping, however, is not taken up in most of the more recent literature (and the two group split was confirmed by native-speaker linguist research). The standard dialect is Kartlian, spoken in the region of Kartli. The majority of speakers in the capital city Tbilisi also speak Kartlian Georgian, although there is a great deal of dialectal variety in Tbilisi. Most dialects spoken in Georgia are mutually intelligible between speakers. Some have higher degrees of lexical variation and therefore are more difficult for speakers of standard Georgian to understand; Gurian and Khevsurian use such different lexemes as to approach unintelligibility (Jorbenadze, 1989). Speakers from both dialect groups above have been included in this speech database. It is important to note, however, that the speech database may not cover all sub-dialects as a number of these sub-dialects are spoken by very small communities, possibly of as little as 3,000 people.