Author:
Fabricius Anne H.,Watt Dominic,Johnson Daniel Ezra
Abstract
AbstractThis article evaluates a speaker-intrinsic vowel formant frequency normalization algorithm initially proposed in Watt & Fabricius (2002). We compare how well this routine, known as the S-centroid procedure, performs as a sociophonetic research tool in three ways: reducing variance in area ratios of vowel spaces (by attempting to equalize vowel space areas); improving overlap of vowel polygons; and reproducing relative positions of vowel means within the vowel space, compared with formant data in raw Hertz. The study uses existing data sets of vowel formant data from two varieties of English, Received Pronunciation and Aberdeen English (northeast Scotland). We conclude that, for the data examined here, the S-centroid W&F procedure performs at least as well as the two speaker-intrinsic, vowel-extrinsic, formant-intrinsic normalization methods rated as best performing by Adank (2003): Lobanov's (1971) z-score procedure and Nearey's (1978) individual log-mean procedure (CLIHi4 in Adank [2003], CLIHi2 as tested here), and in some test cases better than the latter.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Education,Language and Linguistics
Reference33 articles.
1. Bigham Douglas . (2008). Dialect contact and accommodation among emerging adults in a university setting. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin.
2. Formant frequencies of RP monophthongs in four age groups of speakers;Hawkins;Journal of the International Phonetic Association,2005
3. Traunmüller Hartmut . (1997). Auditory scales of frequency representation. Available at: http://www.ling.su.se/staff/hartmut/bark.htm.
4. Classification of Russian Vowels Spoken by Different Speakers
Cited by
66 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献