Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Phonological Parsing in Speech Recognition

  • Book
  • © 1987

Overview

Authors:
  1. Kenneth W. Church

    1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, USA

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

Log in via an institution
eBook USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (9 chapters)

  1. Front Matter

    Pages i-xvii
    Download chapter PDF

  2. Introduction

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 1-40

  3. Representation of Segments

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 41-63

  4. Allophonic Rules

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 65-82

  5. An Alternative: Phrase-Structure Rules

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 83-95

  6. Parser Implementation

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 97-118

  7. Phonotactic Constraints

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 119-131

  8. When Phonotactic Constraints are Not Enough

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 133-154

  9. Robustness Issues

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 155-178

  10. Conclusion

    • Kenneth W. Church
    Pages 179-188

  11. Back Matter

    Pages 189-261
    Download chapter PDF
Back to top

Keywords

About this book

It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a burst at the end of a syllable in a word like cat. Variation such as this is often considered to be problematic for speech recogni­ tion: (1) "In most systems for sentence recognition, such modifications must be viewed as a kind of 'noise' that makes it more difficult to hypothesize lexical candidates given an in­ put phonetic transcription. To see that this must be the case, we note that each phonological rule [in a certain example] results in irreversible ambiguity-the phonological rule does not have a unique inverse that could be used to recover the underlying phonemic representation for a lexical item. For example, . . . schwa vowels could be the first vowel in a word like 'about' or the surface realization of almost any English vowel appearing in a sufficiently destressed word. The tongue flap [(] could have come from a /t! or a /d/. " [65, pp. 548-549] This view of allophonic variation is representative of much of the speech recognition literature, especially during the late 1970's. One can find similar statements by Cole and Jakimik [22] and by Jelinek [50].

Authors and Affiliations

  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, USA

    Kenneth W. Church

Bibliographic Information

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Back to top

Search

Navigation