LINGUIST List 17.218
|
Mon Jan 23 2006
Qs: Category Rating Survey; Measuring Vowel Duration
Editor for this issue: Jessica Boynton
<jessica linguistlist.org>
|
We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate. In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query. To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
|
Directory
1. Raluca
Budiu,
Category Rating Survey
2. Roy
Becker,
Measuring Vowel Duration from Spectrogramme
Message 1: Category Rating Survey
|
Date: 23-Jan-2006
From: Raluca Budiu <budiu parc.com>
Subject: Category Rating Survey
Hello, all, We are conducting an investigation about how people navigate through web pages (and similar hierarchic structures). We are especially interested in finding out how the label of a link affects navigation choices. We would be very grateful if you could spend a few minutes to fill in this category rating survey. It's located at: http://glsa.parc.com/ratings/ It should take at most 15 minutes. We will not be recording any information about who you are, so your response will be completely anonymous. Thank you in advance for your help. Raluca -- Raluca Budiu, Ph.D. Palo Alto Research Center User Interface Research Group
Linguistic Field(s):
Cognitive Science
Psycholinguistics
Semantics
Message 2: Measuring Vowel Duration from Spectrogramme
|
Date: 22-Jan-2006
From: Roy Becker <roybecker humnet.ucla.edu>
Subject: Measuring Vowel Duration from Spectrogramme
Physical duration of segments is relevant for phoneticians and experimental phonologists, among others, both as a stand-alone phenomenon and as a correlate of other speech phenomena (speech-rate, accent, articulator trajectory etc.) as well as linguistic phenomena (intrinsic phoneme property, realization of morae, compensatory lengthening, phrasing etc.) Hence, measuring duration of segments using waveform and spectrogramme is a common practice among phoneticians and experimental phonologists working on field- or lab-collected corpora. It is well-known, however, that measuring segmental duration is not always straightforward, mostly due to gestural overlap. In particular, measuring duration of vowels by determining the temporal boundaries with adjacent segments poses certain methodological problems, for example: 1. Voiceless stops and fricatives can be pre-/post-aspirated. 2. Stop-release may include multiple bursts and/or slight frication. 3. Periods of articulator approximation without true contact, e.g. the transition into/out-of voiced fricatives, when there is no frication but voicelessness would have made a perfect fricative. 4. When the adjacent segment is an approximant, and any point across the boundary into the approximant would have probably counted as part of the vowel if it were part of a transition into/out-of a contact-involving consonant. For example, the acoustics of a dorsal glide are no different from the acoustics of the transition after the release of a homorganic stop, and whatever counts as consonantal in the case of a glide would count as vocalic in the case of a stop (e.g. palatal glide vs. palatal stop). Similarly, in the case of a vocalized velarized lateral, whatever counts as the consonant would have probably counted as part of the vowel if the consonant weren't velarized. All these, and many other situations, are sources for methodological inconsistency in determining segmentation of vowels or any kind of sound. While it is perfectly legitimate to use any methodology if it is designed with common-sense, strictly obeyed and explicitly described, the absence of standard may render related studies mutually incompatible, and may also result in methodological slacking in the case of the less experienced researcher. I would like to know if there is any written standard(s) for making such measurements, and whether researchers adhere to this/these standard(s). I am not interested in personal opinions or in methods practiced in a particular stduy, because these can be found in any experiment report. Thanks, Roy Becker.
Linguistic Field(s):
Phonetics
Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
|
|

Please report any bad links or misclassified data
LINGUIST Homepage | Read
LINGUIST | Contact us

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.
|
|