1887
Volume 24, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Phonological analysis increasingly involves the quantification of various lexical and/or usage statistics, such as phonotactic probabilities, the functional loads of various phonemic contrasts, or neighbourhood densities. This paper presents , a free, open-source software for conducting such phonological analyses on transcribed corpora. The motivations for creating the software are given, along with an overview of the structure of the program, its analysis algorithms, and its applications within phonology.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.18009.hal
2019-11-01
2020-05-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L.
    (1995) The CELEX Lexical Database: English Linguistic Guide. Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved fromhttps://catalog.ldc.upenn.edu/docs/LDC96L14/eug_let.pdf (last accessedAugust 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bod, R., Hay, J., & Jannedy, S.
    (Eds.) (2003) Probabilistic Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5582.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5582.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D.
    (2019) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 6.0.50) [Computer program]. Retrieved fromwww.praat.org (last accessedMarch 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brent, M. R.
    (1999) An efficient, probabilistically sound algorithm for segmentation and word discovery. Machine Learning, 34(1–3), 71–105. 10.1023/A:1007541817488
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007541817488 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brysbaert, M., & New, B.
    (2009) Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, J. L.
    (2001) Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511612886
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612886 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chomsky, N., & Halle, M.
    (1968) The Sound Pattern of English. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cohen Priva, U.
    (2008) Using information content to predict phone deletion. InN. Abner & J. Bishop (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp.90–98). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Durand, J., Gut, U., & Kristoffersen, G.
    (Eds.) (2014) The Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199571932.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199571932.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ernestus, M.
    (2011) Gradience and categoricality in phonological theory. InM. van Oostendorp, C. J. Ewen, E. Hume & K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology (pp.2115–2136). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0089
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0089 [Google Scholar]
  11. Frisch, S.
    (2011) Frequency effects. InM. van Oostendorp, C. J. Ewen, E. Hume & K. Rice (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Phonology (pp.2137–2163). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0090
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0090 [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldsmith, J., & Riggle, J.
    (2012) Information theoretic approaches to phonological structure: The case of Finnish vowel harmony. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 30(3), 859–896. 10.1007/s11049‑012‑9169‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-012-9169-1 [Google Scholar]
  13. Greenberg, J. H., & Jenkins, J.
    (1964) Studies in the psychological correlates of the sound system of American English. Word, 20(1–3), 157–177. 10.1080/00437956.1964.11659816
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659816 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hall, K. C.
    (2009) A Probabilistic Model of Phonological Relationships from Contrast to Allophony (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (2013) A typology of intermediate phonological relationships. The Linguistic Review, 30(2), 215–275. doi:  10.1515/tlr‑2013‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2013-0008 [Google Scholar]
  16. (submitted). Corpora and phonological analysis. InB. E. Dresher & H. Van der Hulst Eds. The Handbook of the History of Phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hall, K. C., Allen, B., Fry, M., Mackie, S., & McAuliffe, M.
    (2015) Calculating functional load with pronunciation variants. Paper presented at theWorkshop on Modeling Variability in Speech, Institute for Natural Language Processing, Stuttgart, Germany.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hall, K. C., Jaeger, T. F., Hume, E., & Wedel, A.
    (2018a) The role of predictability in shaping phonological patterns. Linguistics Vanguard, 4(s2), 1–15. 10.1515/lingvan‑2017‑0027
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2017-0027 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hall, K. C., Pine, A., & Schwan, M. D.
    (2018b) Doing phonological corpus analysis in a fieldwork context. InL. Matthewson, E. A. Guntly & M. Rochemont (Eds.), Wa7 Xweysás i Nqwal’utteníha i Ucwalmícwa: He Loves the People’s Languages: Essays in honour of Henry Davis (pp.615–630). Vancouver, BC: UBC Occasional Papers in Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hayes, B.
    (2009) Introductory Phonology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hockett, C. F.
    (1966) The quantification of functional load: A linguistic problem. U.S. Air Force Memorandum RM-5168-PR.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. International Phonetic Association
    International Phonetic Association (Ed.) (1999) The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Johnson, K.
    (2004) Massive reduction in conversational American English. InK. Yoneyama & K. Maekawa (Eds.), Spontaneous Speech: Data and Analysis (pp.29–54). Tokyo: The International Institute for Japanese Language.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Khorsi, A.
    (2012) On morphological relatedness. Natural Language Engineering, 19(4), 1–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kullback, S., & Leibler, R. A.
    (1951) On information and sufficiency. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 22(1), 79–86. 10.1214/aoms/1177729694
    https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729694 [Google Scholar]
  26. Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B.
    (1998) Recognizing spoken words: The neighborhood activation model. Ear Hear, 19(1), 1–36. 10.1097/00003446‑199802000‑00001
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Pierrehumbert, J. B.
    (2003) Probabilistic phonology: Discrimination and robustness. InR. Bod, J. Hay & S. Jannedy (Eds.), Probabilistic Linguistics (pp.177–228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Pinnow, E., & Connine, C. M.
    (2014) Phonological variant recognition: Representations and rules. Language and Speech, 57(1), 42–67. 10.1177/0023830913479105
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830913479105 [Google Scholar]
  29. Pitt, M. A.
    (2009) The strength and time course of lexical activation of pronunciation variants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3), 896–910.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Pitt, M. A., Dilley, L., Johnson, K., Kiesling, S., Raymond, W., Hume, E., & Fosler-Lussier, E.
    (2007) Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech (2nd Release). Retrieved fromwww.buckeyecorpus.osu.edu (last accessedAugust 2019).
  31. Rose, Y., MacWhinney, B., Byrne, R., Hedlund, G., Maddocks, K., O’Brien, P., & Wareham, T.
    (2006) Introducing Phon: A software solution for the study of phonological acquisition. InD. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia & C. Zaller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.489–500). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Rose, Y., & MacWhinney, B.
    (2014) The PhonBank Project: Data and software-assisted methods for the study of phonology and phonological development. InJ. Durand, U. Gut & G. Kristoffersen (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology (pp.308–401). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Vaden, K. I., Halpin, H. R., & Hickok, G. S.
    (2009) Irvine Phonotactic Online Dictionary (Version 2.0). Retrieved fromwww.iphod.com (last accessedAugust 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vitevitch, M. S. & Luce, P. A.
    (2004) A web-based interface to calculate phonotactic probability for words and nonwords in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(3), 481–487. doi:  10.3758/BF03195594
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195594 [Google Scholar]
  35. Wedel, A., Kaplan, A., & Jackson, S.
    (2013) High functional load inhibits phonological contrast loss: A corpus study. Cognition, 128(2), 179–186. 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  36. Wells, J. C.
    (n.d.). Computer-coding the IPA: A Proposed Extension of SAMPA. London: University College London. Retrieved fromhttps://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/ipasam-x.pdf (last accessedAugust 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.18009.hal
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.18009.hal
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): frequency , functional load , phonology , predictability of distribution and software
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error