DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2002.11800V1 [Cs.CL] 26 Feb 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2002.11800V1 [Cs.CL] 26 Feb 2020 UNIVERSAL PHONE RECOGNITION WITH A MULTILINGUAL ALLOPHONE SYSTEM yXinjian Li ySiddharth Dalmia yJuncheng Li ◦Matthew Lee 4Patrick Littell Jiali Yao yAntonios Anastasopoulos yDavid R. Mortensen yGraham Neubig yAlan W Black yFlorian Metze yCarnegie Mellon University; ◦SIL International; 4National Research Council Canada; ByteDance AI Lab [email protected] ABSTRACT ENGLISH MANDARIN CHINESE Multilingual models can improve language processing, particularly peak speak ping bing for low resource situations, by sharing parameters across languages. ‘level’ ‘ice’ Multilingual acoustic models, however, generally ignore the differ- /pik/ /spik/ /phiN/ /piN/ ence between phonemes (sounds that can support lexical contrasts in a particular language) and their corresponding phones (the sounds that are actually spoken, which are language independent). This h [p ik] [spik] [phiN] [piN] can lead to performance degradation when combining a variety of training languages, as identically annotated phonemes can actually correspond to several different underlying phonetic realizations. In Fig. 1: Words, phonemes (slashes), and phones (square brackets). this work, we propose a joint model of both language-independent phone and language-dependent phoneme distributions. In mul- tilingual ASR experiments over 11 languages, we find that this model improves testing performance by 2% phoneme error rate the sets of phones that correspond to a particular phoneme, are lan- absolute in low-resource conditions. Additionally, because we are guage specific; distinctions that are important in some languages are explicitly modeling language-independent phones, we can build a not important in others. (nearly-)universal phone recognizer that, when combined with the Most multilingual acoustic models simply use existing phoneme PHOIBLE [1] large, manually curated database of phone invento- transcriptions as-is, taking the union of the phoneme sets to be shared ries, can be customized into 2,000 language dependent recognizers. by all training languages [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. The assumption is reasonable Experiments on two low-resourced indigenous languages, Inukti- under some circumstances as phoneme names are typically associ- tut and Tusom, show that our recognizer achieves phone accuracy ated with their most common or least marked allophone. However, improvements of more than 17%, moving a step closer to speech this is obviously an over-simplistic view: in Figure 1, for example, recognition for all languages in the world.1 this would mean that all training in English would assign the phones [p] and [ph] to phoneme /p/. This is detrimental if we want to rec- Index Terms— multilingual speech recognition, universal ognize Mandarin Chinese, for instance, where the two phones are phone recognition, phonology corresponding to two distinctive phonemes /p/ and /ph/. In this paper, we propose a novel method for multilingual 1. INTRODUCTION recognition based on phonetic annotation to tackle this problem: Al- arXiv:2002.11800v1 [cs.CL] 26 Feb 2020 losaurus (allophone system of automatic recognition for universal There is an increasing interest in building speech tools benefiting speech). Our method incorporates knowledge of phonology into the low-resource languages, specifically multilingual models that can multilingual model through an allophone layer, which associates a improve low-resource recognition using rich resources available universal narrow phone set with the phonemes that appear in the in other languages like English and Mandarin. One standard tool transcription of each language. Our model first computes the phone for recognition in low resource languages is multilingual acoustic distribution using a standard ASR encoder, then the allophone layer modeling [2]. Acoustic models are generally trained on parallel maps the phone distribution into the phoneme distribution for each data of speech waveforms and phoneme transcriptions. Importantly, language. This model can be trained end-to-end using only standard phonemes are perceptual units of sound that closely correlate with, phonemic transcriptions and an allophone list created by phoneti- but do not exactly correspond to the actual sounds that are spoken, cians. The allophone layer is first initialized with the allophone list, phones. An example of this is shown in Figure 1, which demon- then is further optimized during the training process. We demon- strates two English words that share the same phoneme /p/, but h strate that accounting for the phoneme-phone mismatch in this way different in the actual phonetic realizations [p] and [p ]. Allophones, improves the accuracy of multilingual acoustic modeling by 2.0% phoneme error rate in low-resource conditions. 1A web demo is available at https://www.dictate.app, the pre- trained model will be released at https://github.com/xinjli/ Furthermore, the architecture simultaneously makes it possible allosaurus to perform universal phone recognition. Previous approaches can- language- specific language 1 3. APPROACH phonemes languageloss ... language 1 language 1 languageloss L 3.1. Phone-Phoneme Annotation language ... language ... loss loss loss language L language L Suppose there are jLj training languages, and each language Li has loss loss allophone layer its own phoneme inventory Qi which can be easily obtained by loss loss allophone layer enumerating the phonemes appearing in its annotated training data. allophone layer Most traditional multilingual approaches handle inventories at the phoneme level, and create a shared phoneme inventory Qsha by tak- language- shared universal phonemes specific ing union of the phoneme sets: encoder encoder phonemes encoder phones [ Shared Phoneme Model Private Phoneme Model Allosaurus Qsha = Qi: (1) 1≤i≤|Lj Fig. 2: Traditional approaches predict phonemes directly, either for In contrast, our method distinguishes phonemes from their all languages (left) or separately for each language (middle). On the phone realizations. We have linguists annotate each phoneme contrary, our approach (right) predicts over a shared phone inventory, i q 2 Qi with its corresponding allophone set Pq , where each phone then maps into language-specific phonemes with an allophone layer. i p 2 Pq is a realization of q in language Li. Merging these sets for all languages, we obtain the universal phone inventory Puni. [ [ i not perform phone recognition in a universal fashion as they de- Puni = Pq (2) pend on language-specific phonemes, as illustrated with the previ- 1≤i≤|Lj q2Qi ous example of English not distinguishing /p/ and /p h/ as required i jQi|×|Punij in Mandarin. In contrast, because our approach allows recognition Additionally, we obtain a signature matrix S = f0; 1g of phones directly, it already has learned to make these fine-grained describing the association of phone and phonemes in each language distinctions. Taking advantage of this fact, we incorporate a large Li: Suppose the phoneme q 2 Qi has the row index j where phone inventory database collected by linguists, PHOIBLE [1], and 1 ≤ j ≤ jQij , phone p 2 Puni has the column index k where 1 ≤ k ≤ jPunij, if the p is a realization of q, then (j; k) cell of the demonstrate that our phone recognizer can be customized to recog- i nize over 2000 languages without any training data in the languages S has a value of 1, otherwise it is assigned 0. themselves. By evaluating the recognizer with completely unseen testing languages, we found that our recognizer achieves 17% better 3.2. Allophone Layer performance absolute compared with the traditional approach. As mentioned in Section 2, traditional multilingual models can be di- vided into two groups. The first group, shared phoneme models (Fig- ure 2 left), predicts phoneme distributions over the shared phoneme inventory Qsha. The second group, private phoneme models (Figure 2 middle), on the other hand, shares a common encoder but computes 2. RELATED WORK distribution over private phoneme inventory Qi for each language Li. These approaches handle phonemes directly with no concept of While some recent work in multilingual ASR focuses on end-to-end underlying phones. models to directly predict graphemes [8, 9], most systems still de- In contrast our proposed approach, Allosaurus, (Figure 2 right), pend on phonetically inspired acoustic models. Multilingual acous- comprises a language independent encoder and phone predictor, and tic models fall into two groups. The first group, shared phoneme a language dependent allophone layer and a loss function associ- models, creates a shared phoneme inventory of all phonemes from ated with each language. The encoder first produces the distribution jPunij all training languages [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10]. The second group, pri- h 2 R over the universal phone inventory Puni, then the allo- i jQij vate phoneme models, treats phonemes from each language as com- phone layer transforms h into phoneme distribution g 2 R of each language. The allophone layer uses a trainable allophone ma- pletely different classes performs phoneme classification separately i jQ |×|P j trix W 2 R i uni to describe allophones in the similar way as for each language [11, 2, 12]. However, these two groups have their i i i own respective drawbacks: the first group fails to consider the dis- S . The allophone matrix W is first initialized with S , and is al- connect between the phonemes across languages while the second lowed to be optimized during the training process, but we add an L2 penalty to penalize divergence from the original signature matrix Si. group completely
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Writing & Language Development Center Phonetic Alphabet for English Language Learners Pin, Play, Top, Pretty, Poppy, Possibl
    Writing & Language Development Center Phonetic Alphabet f o r English Language Learners A—The Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) is a system of phonetic symbols developed by linguists to represent P each of the wide variety of sounds (phones or phonemes) used in spoken human language. This includes both vowel and consonant sounds. The IPA is used to signal the pronunciation of words. Each symbol is treated separately, with examples (like those used in the dictionary) so you can pronounce the word in American English. Single consonant sounds Symbol Sound Example p p in “pen” pin, play, top, pretty, poppy, possible, pepper, pour t t in “taxi” tell, time, toy, tempted, tent, tender, bent, taste, to ɾ or ţ t in “bottle” butter, writer, rider, pretty, matter, city, pity ʔ or t¬ t in “button” cotton, curtain, kitten, Clinton, continent, forgotten k c in “corn” c in “car”, k in “kill”, q in “queen”, copy, kin, quilt s s in “sandal” c in “cell” or s in “sell”, city, sinful, receive, fussy, so f f in “fan” f in “face” or ph in “phone” gh laugh, fit, photo, graph m m in “mouse” miss, camera, home, woman, dam, mb in “bomb” b b in “boot” bother, boss, baby, maybe, club, verb, born, snobby d d in “duck” dude, duck, daytime, bald, blade, dinner, sudden, do g g in “goat” go, guts, giggle, girlfriend, gift, guy, goat, globe, go z z in “zebra” zap, zipper, zoom, zealous, jazz, zucchini, zero v v in “van” very, vaccine, valid, veteran, achieve, civil, vivid n n in “nurse” never, nose, nice, sudden, tent, knife, knight, nickel l l in “lake” liquid, laugh, linger,
    [Show full text]
  • FACTORS AFFECTING PROFICIENCY AMONG GUJARATI HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS on THREE CONTINENTS a Dissertation Submitted to the Facu
    FACTORS AFFECTING PROFICIENCY AMONG GUJARATI HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS ON THREE CONTINENTS A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics By Sheena Shah, M.S. Washington, DC May 14, 2013 Copyright 2013 by Sheena Shah All Rights Reserved ii FACTORS AFFECTING PROFICIENCY AMONG GUJARATI HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS ON THREE CONTINENTS Sheena Shah, M.S. Thesis Advisors: Alison Mackey, Ph.D. Natalie Schilling, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the causes behind the differences in proficiency in the North Indian language Gujarati among heritage learners of Gujarati in three diaspora locations. In particular, I focus on whether there is a relationship between heritage language ability and ethnic and cultural identity. Previous studies have reported divergent findings. Some have found a positive relationship (e.g., Cho, 2000; Kang & Kim, 2011; Phinney, Romero, Nava, & Huang, 2001; Soto, 2002), whereas others found no correlation (e.g., C. L. Brown, 2009; Jo, 2001; Smolicz, 1992), or identified only a partial relationship (e.g., Mah, 2005). Only a few studies have addressed this question by studying one community in different transnational locations (see, for example, Canagarajah, 2008, 2012a, 2012b). The current study addresses this matter by examining data from members of the same ethnic group in similar educational settings in three multi-ethnic and multilingual cities. The results of this study are based on a survey consisting of questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and proficiency tests with 135 participants. Participants are Gujarati heritage language learners from the U.K., Singapore, and South Africa, who are either current students or recent graduates of a Gujarati School.
    [Show full text]
  • Phones and Phonemes
    NLPA-Phon1 (4/10/07) © P. Coxhead, 2006 Page 1 Natural Language Processing & Applications Phones and Phonemes 1 Phonemes If we are to understand how speech might be generated or recognized by a computer, we need to study some of the underlying linguistic theory. The aim here is to UNDERSTAND the theory rather than memorize it. I’ve tried to reduce and simplify as much as possible without serious inaccuracy. Speech consists of sequences of sounds. The use of an instrument (such as a speech spectro- graph) shows that most of normal speech consists of continuous sounds, both within words and across word boundaries. Speakers of a language can easily dissect its continuous sounds into words. With more difficulty, they can split words into component sounds, or ‘segments’. However, it is not always clear where to stop splitting. In the word strip, for example, should the sound represented by the letters str be treated as a unit, be split into the two sounds represented by st and r, or be split into the three sounds represented by s, t and r? One approach to isolating component sounds is to look for ‘distinctive unit sounds’ or phonemes.1 For example, three phonemes can be distinguished in the word cat, corresponding to the letters c, a and t (but of course English spelling is notoriously non- phonemic so correspondence of phonemes and letters should not be expected). How do we know that these three are ‘distinctive unit sounds’ or phonemes of the English language? NOT from the sounds themselves. A speech spectrograph will not show a neat division of the sound of the word cat into three parts.
    [Show full text]
  • English Teachers' Mastery of the English Aspiration And
    Arina Isti’anah - English Teachers’ Mastery of the English Aspiration and Stress Rules ENGLISH TEACHERS’ MASTERY OF THE ENGLISH ASPIRATION AND STRESS RULES Arina Isti’anah Sanata Dharma University [email protected] Abstract This paper tries to observe the English teachers’ awareness and representation of the English aspiration and stress rules. The research purposes to find out whether or not the teachers are aware of the English aspiration and stress rules, and to find out how the teachers represent the English aspiration and stress rules. Based on the analysis, it can be concluded that the teachers’ awareness of the English aspiration and stress rules is very low. It is indicated with the percentage which equals to 44% and 48% for English aspiration and stress rules. In representing the English aspiration and stress rules, the teachers face the problems in producing aspiration in the pronunciation, placing the right stress and pronouncing three and four X in the coda position. There are two reasons affecting the teachers’ awareness of the English aspiration and stress rules namely exposure and L1 influence. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk meneliti kesadaran dan representasi aturan aspirasi dan tekanan oleh guru bahasa Inggris. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan apakah guru bahasa Inggris mempunyai kesadaran atas aturan aspirasi dan tekanan dalam bahasa Inggris, dan untuk menunjukkan bagaimana guru Bahasa Inggris mewujudkan aturan aspirasi dan tekanan dalam pelafalan mereka. Berdasarkan analisis yang dilakukan, dapat disimpulkan bahwa kesadaran guru Bahasa Inggris atas aturan aspirasi dan tekanan dalam Bahasa Inggris masih sangat rendah. Hal tersebut ditunjukkan oleh rendahnya prosentase dalam perwujudan aturan aspirasi dan tekanan: 44% dan 48%.
    [Show full text]
  • A Deep Generative Model of Vowel Formant Typology
    A Deep Generative Model of Vowel Formant Typology Ryan Cotterell and Jason Eisner Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, 21218 ryan.cotterell,eisner @jhu.edu { } Abstract and its goal should be the construction of a univer- sal prior over potential languages. A probabilistic What makes some types of languages more approach does not rule out linguistic systems com- probable than others? For instance, we know pletely (as long as one’s theoretical formalism can that almost all spoken languages contain the vowel phoneme /i/; why should that be? The describe them at all), but it can position phenomena field of linguistic typology seeks to answer on a scale from very common to very improbable. these questions and, thereby, divine the mech- Probabilistic modeling also provides a discipline anisms that underlie human language. In our for drawing conclusions from sparse data. While work, we tackle the problem of vowel system we know of over 7000 human languages, we have typology, i.e., we propose a generative proba- some sort of linguistic analysis for only 2300 of bility model of which vowels a language con- them (Comrie et al., 2013), and the dataset used in tains. In contrast to previous work, we work di- rectly with the acoustic information—the first this paper (Becker-Kristal, 2010) provides simple two formant values—rather than modeling dis- vowel data for fewer than 250 languages. crete sets of phonemic symbols (IPA). We de- Formants are the resonant frequencies of the hu- velop a novel generative probability model and man vocal tract during the production of speech report results based on a corpus of 233 lan- sounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Phonics TRB Coding Chart
    Coding Charts The following coding charts briefly explain vowel and spelling rules, syllable-division patterns, letter clusters, and coding marks used in Saxon’s phonics programs. Basic Coding TO CODE USE EXAMPLE Accented syllables Accent marks noÆ C ’s that make a /k/ sound, as in “cat” K-backs |cat C ’s that make a /s/ sound, as in “cell” Cedillas çell Combinations; diphthongs Arcs ar™ Digraphs; trigraphs; quadrigraphs Underlines SH___ Final, stable syllables Brackets [fle Long vowel sounds Macrons nO Schwa vowel sounds (rhymes with vowel sound in “sun,” as Schwas o÷ (or ) in “some,” “about,” and “won”) Short vowel sounds Breves log Sight words Circles ≤are≥ Silent letters Slash marks mak´ Affixes Boxes work ingfl Syllables Syllable division lines cac\tus Voiced sounds Voice lines hiß Vowel Rules RULE CODING EXAMPLE A vowel followed by a consonant is short; code it logcatsit with a breve. An open, accented vowel is long; code it with a nOÆ mEÆ íÆ gOÆ macron. AÆ\|cor™n OÆ\p»n EÆ\v»n A vowel followed by a consonant and a silent e is long; code the vowel with a macron and cross out the nAm´ hOp´ lIk´ silent e. An open, unaccented vowel can make a schwa b«\nanÆ\« E\rAs´Æ hO\telÆ sound. The letters e, o, and u can also make a long sound. The letter i can also make a short sound. JU\lŒÆ di\vId´Æ Copyright by Saxon Publishers, Inc. Spelling Rules† RULE EXAMPLE Floss Rule: When a one-syllable root word has a short vowel sound followed by the sound /f/, /l/, or /s/, it is puff doll pass usually spelled ff, ll, or ss.
    [Show full text]
  • Grapheme-To-Phone Using Finite-State Transducers D
    GRAPHEME-TO-PHONE USING FINITE-STATE TRANSDUCERS D. Caseiro, I. Trancoso, L. Oliveira C. Viana INESC-ID/IST CLUL RuaAlves Redol 9, 1000-029 Lisbon, Portugal Av.Prof. Gama Pinto 2, Lisbon, Portugal ABSTRACT Some of the most common approaches to grapheme-to-phone convertion can be compiled to WFSTs,among which are CARTs Severalapproaches have been adopted over the years for [6], and most rule systems, such as two-level [7] and rewriting grapheme-to-phone conversion for European Portuguese: hand- rules [8]. derived rules, neural networks, classification and regression trees, In this work, we first show how we compiled the rules of the etc. This paper describes different approaches implemented as DIXI system to WFSTs (Section 2), we then present data-driven Weighted Finite State Transducers (WFSTs), motivated by their approaches to the problem (Section 3), and finally we combine the flexibility in integrating multiples sources of information and other knowledge-based with the data-driven approaches (Section 4). interesting properties such as inversion. We describe and compare In order to assess the performance of the different methods, we rule-based, data-driven and hybrid approaches. Best results were used a pronunciation lexicon built on the PF (“Portuguˆes Funda- obtained with the rule-based approach, but one should take into mental”) corpus. The lexicon contains around 26000 forms. 25% account the fact that the data-driven one was trained with automat- of the corpus was randomly selected for evaluation. The remaining ically transcribed material. portion of the corpus was used for training or debugging. The sizeofthetraining material for the data-driven approaches was increased with a subset of the BD-P´ublico [9] text corpus.
    [Show full text]
  • Globalphone: Pronunciation Dictionaries in 20 Languages
    GlobalPhone: Pronunciation Dictionaries in 20 Languages Tanja Schultz and Tim Schlippe Cognitive Systems Lab, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Germany [email protected] Abstract This paper describes the advances in the multilingual text and speech database GLOBALPHONE a multilingual database of high-quality read speech with corresponding transcriptions and pronunciation dictionaries in 20 languages. GLOBALPHONE was designed to be uniform across languages with respect to the amount of data, speech quality, the collection scenario, the transcription and phone set conventions. With more than 400 hours of transcribed audio data from more than 2000 native speakers GLOBALPHONE supplies an excellent basis for research in the areas of multilingual speech recognition, rapid deployment of speech processing systems to yet unsupported languages, language identification tasks, speaker recognition in multiple languages, multilingual speech synthesis, as well as monolingual speech recognition in a large variety of languages. Very recently the GLOBALPHONE pronunciation dictionaries have been made available for research and commercial purposes by the European Language Resources Association (ELRA). Keywords: Speech, Text, and Dictionary Resources for Multilingual Speech Processing 1. Introduction More than ten years ago we released a multilingual text With more than 7100 languages in the world (Lewis et al., and speech corpus GLOBALPHONE to address the lack of 2013) and the need to support multiple input and output databases which are consistent across languages (Schultz, languages, it is one of the most pressing challenge for the 2002). By that time the database consisted of 15 languages speech and language community to develop and deploy but since then has been extended significantly to cover more speech processing systems in yet unsupported languages languages, more speakers, more text resources, and more rapidly and at reasonable costs (Schultz, 2004; Schultz and word types along with their pronunciations.
    [Show full text]
  • Collation Sounds Boo
    In a nutshell……… Synthetic Phonics Teaching: The best way to teach the technical skills of reading (decoding) and spelling (encoding) in the English language is to teach the core code knowledge of The English Alphabetic Code in systematic steps and the three core skills of: 1. READING - sound out and blend (synthesise) the sounds (phonemes) represented by the letters and letter groups (graphemes) all-through-the-printed-word, from left to right (e.g. see ‘tray’, say “/t/ /r/ /ai/”, hear and say “tray”). 2. SPELLING - segment (or split up) the smallest identifiable sounds (phonemes) all-through-the-spoken-word (e.g. hear “tray”, identify /t/ /r/ /ai/) and then pull letter/s from memory to spell the word ‘tray’. 3. WRITING - record the correct shapes of the letters or letter groups (graphemes), from left to right, which represent the phonemes identified from segmenting the spoken word from beginning to end. The English Alphabetic Code: We can identify around 44 phonemes (the smallest identifiable sounds in words) in the English language but there are only 26 letters in The Alphabet to represent the 44+ sounds. Single letters and letters combined into letter groups act as code for the sounds, for example; the grapheme ‘ie’ is pronounced /igh/ as in the word ‘tie’. The English Alphabetic Code is complicated by the fact that it has many ‘spelling alternatives’ and ‘pronunciation alternatives’, for example; the grapheme ‘ie’ can also be pronounced /ee/ as in the word ‘chief’. The Alphabetic Code, therefore, needs to be taught explicitly and systematically for both reading and spelling.
    [Show full text]
  • The Phonetics and Phonology of Retroflexes Published By
    The Phonetics and Phonology of Retroflexes Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6006 Trans 10 fax: +31 30 253 6000 3512 JK Utrecht e-mail: [email protected] The Netherlands http://wwwlot.let.uu.nl/ Cover illustration by Silke Hamann ISBN 90-76864-39-X NUR 632 Copyright © 2003 Silke Hamann. All rights reserved. The Phonetics and Phonology of Retroflexes Fonetiek en fonologie van retroflexen (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, Prof. Dr. W.H. Gispen, ingevolge het besluit van het College voor Promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 6 juni 2003 des middags te 4.15 uur door Silke Renate Hamann geboren op 25 februari 1971 te Lampertheim, Duitsland Promotoren: Prof. dr. T. A. Hall (Leipzig University) Prof. dr. Wim Zonneveld (Utrecht University) Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Markedness of retroflexes 3 1.2 Phonetic cues and phonological features 6 1.3 Outline of the dissertation 8 Part I: Phonetics of Retroflexes 2 Articulatory variation and common properties of retroflexes 11 2.1 Phonetic terminology 12 2.2 Parameters of articulatory variation 14 2.2.1 Speaker dependency 15 2.2.2 Vowel context 16 2.2.3 Speech rate 17 2.2.4 Manner dependency 19 2.2.4.1 Plosives 19 2.2.4.2 Nasals 20 2.2.4.3 Fricatives 21 2.2.4.4 Affricates 23 2.2.4.5 Laterals 24 2.2.4.6 Rhotics 25 2.2.4.7 Retroflex vowels 26 2.2.5 Language family 27 2.2.6 Iventory size 28 2.3 Common articulatory properties of retroflexion 32 2.3.1 Apicality 33 2.3.2 Posteriority
    [Show full text]
  • Phone Merger Specification for Multilingual ASR: the Motorola Polyphone Network
    Phone Merger Specification for Multilingual ASR: The Motorola Polyphone Network Lynette Melnar and Jim Talley Motorola Human Interface Labs, Voice Dialog Systems Lab, USA E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT 2. MOTPOLY: OVERVIEW This paper describes the Motorola Polyphone Network MotPoly is a knowledge-based, hierarchically arranged (MotPoly), a hierarchical, universal phone phone merger specification network for shared correspondence network that defines allowable phone multilingual and multi-dialect acoustic modeling. The mergers for shared acoustic modeling in multilingual and organization of MotPoly is language-independent and multi-dialect automatic speech recognition (ML-ASR). phone merger is defined by an internally ranked system of MotPoly’s organization is defined by phonetic similarity relative phonetic similarity, phonological contrastiveness, and other language-independent phonological factors. and phone frequency. MotPoly functions in ML-ASR as a Unlike other approaches to shared acoustic modeling, phone merger framework that constrains data-driven MotPoly can be effectively used in systems where acoustic modeling strategies. Because MotPoly is not computational resources are limited, such as portable biased toward any particular language, language family, devices. Furthermore, it is less constrained by language or language type, it is a universal, static definition of data availability than other approaches. With MotPoly as phone merger and can be used unmodified to specify part of an overall strategy, Motorola’s Voice Dialog likely mergers for an unlimited number of phones from Systems Lab’s ML-ASR team was able to define a set of any collection of languages or dialects. multilingual acoustic models whose size was only 23% of the largest monolingual model set but whose overall MotPoly is of particular value in applications that are performance was higher than the monolingual models by restricted in computational and language resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Phonemes and Allophones of English Consonants
    Rough definition of phoneme • Phoneme (Concise Dictionary of English consonants: Linguistics, Oxford U. Press 1997) Phonemes and Allophones • “The smallest distinct sound unit in a given language: e.g. /»tIp/ in English realizes the Effects related to aspiration and three successive phonemes, represented in ‘devoiced’ voiced sounds and a few spelling by the letters t, i, and p. other issues Phonemic differences vs. Phonemes allophonic differences • Strict, detailed definitions of the term phoneme are • Differences in speech sound that can signal complex differences between two different words are – Not part of this course phonemic differences – Take phonology courses to fight over the details • Other differences in speech sound that are • Rough and ready idea is indispensable for practical phonetics clearly audible are only allophonic – Must make a distinction between phonemic and differences allophonic differences – ‘pronunciation variants’ that cannot signal different words. Representing allophonic Answer: ‘pie, spy, buy’ differences • ‘Broad’ (= coarse-grained) transcription enough Phonemes in ‘/’ (slash or solidus, pl solidi) for phonemic representation marks – Choose simple symbol for a ‘representative’ (allo)phone /p/ /b/ • ‘Narrow’ (= fine-grained) transcription often requires diacritics • Diacritics for stops [p] [pH] [b] [b8] pH - aspirated p p| - ‘p with inaudible release’ (‘unreleased p’) b8 - ‘(partially) devoiced b’ Phones in square brackets Examples ‘Stop.’, ‘Stop!’, Examples: ‘pie, spy, buy’ ‘Stop!!’, ‘Stob!’ • ‘pie’ [»pHaj]
    [Show full text]