Phonetics and Speech Sciences (말소리와 음성과학)

Korean Society of Speech Sciences (한국음성학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Reduction and Frequency Analyses of Vowels and Consonants in the Buckeye Speech Corpus

  • Received : 2012.07.25
  • Accepted : 2012.09.10
  • Published : 2012.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aims of this study were three. First, to examine the degree of deviation from dictionary prescribed symbols and actual speech made by American English speakers. Second, to measure the frequency of vowel and consonant production of American English speakers. And third, to investigate gender differences in the segmental sounds in a speech corpus. The Buckeye Speech Corpus was recorded by forty American male and female subjects for one hour per subject. The vowels and consonants in both the phonemic and phonetic transcriptions were extracted from the original files of the corpus and their frequencies were obtained using codes of a free software R. Results were as follows: Firstly, the American English speakers produced a reduced number of vowels and consonants in daily conversation. The reduction rate from the dictionary transcriptions to the actual transcriptions was around 38.2%. Secondly, the American English speakers used more front high and back low vowels while three-fourths of the consonants accounted for stops, fricatives, and nasals. This indicates that the segmental inventory has nonlinear frequency distribution in the speech corpus. Thirdly, the two gender groups produced vowels and consonants similarly even though there were a few noticeable differences in their speech. From these results we propose that English teachers consider pronunciation education reflecting the actual speech sounds and that linguists find a way to establish unmarked segmentals from speech corpora.

Keywords

References

  1. Yang, B. (2008). English pronunciation: A new approach using a computer. Busan: PNU Press. (양병곤 (2008). 영어발음: 컴퓨터를 활용한 새로운 접근. 부산: 부산대학교출판부.)
  2. Yoon, K. (2012). Error correction and Praat script tools for the Buckeye Corpus of conversational speech, Phonetics and Speech Sciences, Vol. 4. No. 1, 29-47. (윤규철 (2012). 벅아이 코퍼스 오류 수정과 코퍼스 활용을 위한 프랏 스크립트 툴, 말소리와 음성과학, 4권 1호, 29-47.) https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2012.4.1.029
  3. Ball, M. J. & Rahilly, J. (1999). Phonetics: The science of speech. London: Arnold.
  4. Battistella, E. (1990). Markedness: The evaluative superstructure of language. Albany: The State University of New York Press.
  5. Bell, A., Brenier, J. M., Gregory, M., Girand, C. & Jurafsky, D. (2009). Predictability effects on durations of content and function words in conversational English, Journal of Memory and Language, Vol. 60, 92-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2008.06.003
  6. Eckman, F. (1977). Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis, Language Learning, Vol. 27, 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00124.x
  7. Eckman, F. (1991). The Structural Conformity Hypothesis and the acquisition of consonant clusters in the interlanguage of ESL learners, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Vol. 13, 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009700
  8. Eckman, F. (2004). Universals, innateness and explanation in second language acquisition, Studies in Language, Vol. 28, 682-703. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.28.3.18eck
  9. Jakobson, R. (1941). Child language, aphasia, and phonological universals. The Hague: Mouton.
  10. Johnson, K. (2003). Massive reduction in conversational American English, Proceedings of the Workshop on Spontaneous Speech: Data and Analysis. August, 2002, Tokyo.
  11. Kiesling, S., Dilley, L. & Raymond, W. D. (2006). The Variation in Conversation (ViC) project: creation of the Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech, http://buckeyecorpus.osu.edu/BuckeyeCorpus manual.pdf, retrieved from the webpage on June 27, 2012.
  12. Kim, Nahk Bohk. (2009). A corpus-based lexical analysis of the speech texts: A collocational approach, English Language & Literature Teaching, Vol. 15, No. 3, 151-170.
  13. Ladefoged, P. & Johnson, K. (2010). A course in phonetics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
  14. Lodge, K. (2009). A critical introduction to phonetics. New York: Continuum.
  15. Maddieson, I. (1984). Patterns of sounds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Maddieson, I. (1992). The structure of segment sequences. In Ohala, J. J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 1992 International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 1-4). University of Alberta, Banff, Alberta: Addendum.
  17. Maddieson, I. (1997). Phonetic universals. In Hardcastle, W. J. & Laver, J. (eds.), The handbook of phonetic sciences (pp. 619-639). Oxford: Blackwell,
  18. Prince, A. & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in a generative grammar. Rutgers University Optimality Archive.
  19. Raymond, W. D., Dautricourt, R. & Hume, E. (2006). Wordinternal /t, d/ deletion in spontaneous speech: Modeling the effects of extra-linguistic, lexical, and phonological factors, Language Variation and Change, Vol. 18, 55-97. http://buckeyecorpus.osu.edu/BuckeyeCorpusmanual.pdf, retrieved from the webpage on June 30, 2012.
  20. Trubetzkoy, N. (1939). Principles of phonology. Paris: Klincksieck.
  21. Yaguchi, M., Iyeiri, Y. & Baba, Y. (2010). Speech style and gender distinctions in the use of very and real/really: An analysis of the Corpus of Spoken Professional American English, Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 42, 585-597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.08.002

Cited by

  1. Phoneme distribution and syllable structure of entry words in the CMU English Pronouncing Dictionary vol.8, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2016.8.2.011
  2. Phoneme distribution and phonological processes of orthographic and pronounced phrasal words in light of syllable structure in the Seoul Corpus vol.8, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2016.8.3.001
  3. Phonological processes of vowels from orthographic to pronounced words in the Buckeye Corpus by sex and age groups* vol.10, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2018.10.2.025
  4. Phonological processes of vowels from orthographic to pronounced words in the Buckeye Corpus by sex and age groups* vol.10, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.13064/KSSS.2018.10.2.25