4,243 research outputs found
A Transformation-Based Learning Method on Generating Korean Standard Pronunciation
PACLIC 21 / Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea / November 1-3, 200
A Comparison of Different Machine Transliteration Models
Machine transliteration is a method for automatically converting words in one
language into phonetically equivalent ones in another language. Machine
transliteration plays an important role in natural language applications such
as information retrieval and machine translation, especially for handling
proper nouns and technical terms. Four machine transliteration models --
grapheme-based transliteration model, phoneme-based transliteration model,
hybrid transliteration model, and correspondence-based transliteration model --
have been proposed by several researchers. To date, however, there has been
little research on a framework in which multiple transliteration models can
operate simultaneously. Furthermore, there has been no comparison of the four
models within the same framework and using the same data. We addressed these
problems by 1) modeling the four models within the same framework, 2) comparing
them under the same conditions, and 3) developing a way to improve machine
transliteration through this comparison. Our comparison showed that the hybrid
and correspondence-based models were the most effective and that the four
models can be used in a complementary manner to improve machine transliteration
performance
CAPT๋ฅผ ์ํ ๋ฐ์ ๋ณ์ด ๋ถ์ ๋ฐ CycleGAN ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ํผ๋๋ฐฑ ์์ฑ
ํ์๋
ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ์ฌ)--์์ธ๋ํ๊ต ๋ํ์ :์ธ๋ฌธ๋ํ ํ๋๊ณผ์ ์ธ์ง๊ณผํ์ ๊ณต,2020. 2. ์ ๋ฏผํ.Despite the growing popularity in learning Korean as a foreign language and the rapid development in language learning applications, the existing computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) systems in Korean do not utilize linguistic characteristics of non-native Korean speech. Pronunciation variations in non-native speech are far more diverse than those observed in native speech, which may pose a difficulty in combining such knowledge in an automatic system. Moreover, most of the existing methods rely on feature extraction results from signal processing, prosodic analysis, and natural language processing techniques. Such methods entail limitations since they necessarily depend on finding the right features for the task and the extraction accuracies.
This thesis presents a new approach for corrective feedback generation in a CAPT system, in which pronunciation variation patterns and linguistic correlates with accentedness are analyzed and combined with a deep neural network approach, so that feature engineering efforts are minimized while maintaining the linguistically important factors for the corrective feedback generation task. Investigations on non-native Korean speech characteristics in contrast with those of native speakers, and their correlation with accentedness judgement show that both segmental and prosodic variations are important factors in a Korean CAPT system.
The present thesis argues that the feedback generation task can be interpreted as a style transfer problem, and proposes to evaluate the idea using generative adversarial network. A corrective feedback generation model is trained on 65,100 read utterances by 217 non-native speakers of 27 mother tongue backgrounds. The features are automatically learnt in an unsupervised way in an auxiliary classifier CycleGAN setting, in which the generator learns to map a foreign accented speech to native speech distributions. In order to inject linguistic knowledge into the network, an auxiliary classifier is trained so that the feedback also identifies the linguistic error types that were defined in the first half of the thesis. The proposed approach generates a corrected version the speech using the learners own voice, outperforming the conventional Pitch-Synchronous Overlap-and-Add method.์ธ๊ตญ์ด๋ก์์ ํ๊ตญ์ด ๊ต์ก์ ๋ํ ๊ด์ฌ์ด ๊ณ ์กฐ๋์ด ํ๊ตญ์ด ํ์ต์์ ์๊ฐ ํฌ๊ฒ ์ฆ๊ฐํ๊ณ ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์์ฑ์ธ์ด์ฒ๋ฆฌ ๊ธฐ์ ์ ์ ์ฉํ ์ปดํจํฐ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ๋ฐ์ ๊ต์ก(Computer-Assisted Pronunciation Training; CAPT) ์ดํ๋ฆฌ์ผ์ด์
์ ๋ํ ์ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ํ ์ ๊ทน์ ์ผ๋ก ์ด๋ฃจ์ด์ง๊ณ ์๋ค. ๊ทธ๋ผ์๋ ๋ถ๊ตฌํ๊ณ ํ์กดํ๋ ํ๊ตญ์ด ๋งํ๊ธฐ ๊ต์ก ์์คํ
์ ์ธ๊ตญ์ธ์ ํ๊ตญ์ด์ ๋ํ ์ธ์ดํ์ ํน์ง์ ์ถฉ๋ถํ ํ์ฉํ์ง ์๊ณ ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์ต์ ์ธ์ด์ฒ๋ฆฌ ๊ธฐ์ ๋ํ ์ ์ฉ๋์ง ์๊ณ ์๋ ์ค์ ์ด๋ค. ๊ฐ๋ฅํ ์์ธ์ผ๋ก์จ๋ ์ธ๊ตญ์ธ ๋ฐํ ํ๊ตญ์ด ํ์์ ๋ํ ๋ถ์์ด ์ถฉ๋ถํ๊ฒ ์ด๋ฃจ์ด์ง์ง ์์๋ค๋ ์ , ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ ๊ด๋ จ ์ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ ์์ด๋ ์ด๋ฅผ ์๋ํ๋ ์์คํ
์ ๋ฐ์ํ๊ธฐ์๋ ๊ณ ๋ํ๋ ์ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ ํ์ํ๋ค๋ ์ ์ด ์๋ค. ๋ฟ๋ง ์๋๋ผ CAPT ๊ธฐ์ ์ ๋ฐ์ ์ผ๋ก๋ ์ ํธ์ฒ๋ฆฌ, ์ด์จ ๋ถ์, ์์ฐ์ด์ฒ๋ฆฌ ๊ธฐ๋ฒ๊ณผ ๊ฐ์ ํน์ง ์ถ์ถ์ ์์กดํ๊ณ ์์ด์ ์ ํฉํ ํน์ง์ ์ฐพ๊ณ ์ด๋ฅผ ์ ํํ๊ฒ ์ถ์ถํ๋ ๋ฐ์ ๋ง์ ์๊ฐ๊ณผ ๋
ธ๋ ฅ์ด ํ์ํ ์ค์ ์ด๋ค. ์ด๋ ์ต์ ๋ฅ๋ฌ๋ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ ์ธ์ด์ฒ๋ฆฌ ๊ธฐ์ ์ ํ์ฉํจ์ผ๋ก์จ ์ด ๊ณผ์ ๋ํ ๋ฐ์ ์ ์ฌ์ง๊ฐ ๋ง๋ค๋ ๋ฐ๋ฅผ ์์ฌํ๋ค.
๋ฐ๋ผ์ ๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ๋ ๋จผ์ CAPT ์์คํ
๊ฐ๋ฐ์ ์์ด ๋ฐ์ ๋ณ์ด ์์๊ณผ ์ธ์ดํ์ ์๊ด๊ด๊ณ๋ฅผ ๋ถ์ํ์๋ค. ์ธ๊ตญ์ธ ํ์๋ค์ ๋ญ๋
์ฒด ๋ณ์ด ์์๊ณผ ํ๊ตญ์ด ์์ด๋ฏผ ํ์๋ค์ ๋ญ๋
์ฒด ๋ณ์ด ์์์ ๋์กฐํ๊ณ ์ฃผ์ํ ๋ณ์ด๋ฅผ ํ์ธํ ํ, ์๊ด๊ด๊ณ ๋ถ์์ ํตํ์ฌ ์์ฌ์ํต์ ์ํฅ์ ๋ฏธ์น๋ ์ค์๋๋ฅผ ํ์
ํ์๋ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์ข
์ฑ ์ญ์ ์ 3์ค ๋๋ฆฝ์ ํผ๋, ์ด๋ถ์ ๊ด๋ จ ์ค๋ฅ๊ฐ ๋ฐ์ํ ๊ฒฝ์ฐ ํผ๋๋ฐฑ ์์ฑ์ ์ฐ์ ์ ์ผ๋ก ๋ฐ์ํ๋ ๊ฒ์ด ํ์ํ๋ค๋ ๊ฒ์ด ํ์ธ๋์๋ค.
๊ต์ ๋ ํผ๋๋ฐฑ์ ์๋์ผ๋ก ์์ฑํ๋ ๊ฒ์ CAPT ์์คํ
์ ์ค์ํ ๊ณผ์ ์ค ํ๋์ด๋ค. ๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ๋ ์ด ๊ณผ์ ๊ฐ ๋ฐํ์ ์คํ์ผ ๋ณํ์ ๋ฌธ์ ๋ก ํด์์ด ๊ฐ๋ฅํ๋ค๊ณ ๋ณด์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ์์ฑ์ ์ ๋ ์ ๊ฒฝ๋ง (Cycle-consistent Generative Adversarial Network; CycleGAN) ๊ตฌ์กฐ์์ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋งํ๋ ๊ฒ์ ์ ์ํ์๋ค. GAN ๋คํธ์ํฌ์ ์์ฑ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ๋น์์ด๋ฏผ ๋ฐํ์ ๋ถํฌ์ ์์ด๋ฏผ ๋ฐํ ๋ถํฌ์ ๋งคํ์ ํ์ตํ๋ฉฐ, Cycle consistency ์์คํจ์๋ฅผ ์ฌ์ฉํจ์ผ๋ก์จ ๋ฐํ๊ฐ ์ ๋ฐ์ ์ธ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ์ ์งํจ๊ณผ ๋์์ ๊ณผ๋ํ ๊ต์ ์ ๋ฐฉ์งํ์๋ค. ๋ณ๋์ ํน์ง ์ถ์ถ ๊ณผ์ ์ด ์์ด ํ์ํ ํน์ง๋ค์ด CycleGAN ํ๋ ์์ํฌ์์ ๋ฌด๊ฐ๋
๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ผ๋ก ์ค์ค๋ก ํ์ต๋๋ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ผ๋ก, ์ธ์ด ํ์ฅ์ด ์ฉ์ดํ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ด๋ค.
์ธ์ดํ์ ๋ถ์์์ ๋๋ฌ๋ ์ฃผ์ํ ๋ณ์ด๋ค ๊ฐ์ ์ฐ์ ์์๋ Auxiliary Classifier CycleGAN ๊ตฌ์กฐ์์ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋งํ๋ ๊ฒ์ ์ ์ํ์๋ค. ์ด ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ ๊ธฐ์กด์ CycleGAN์ ์ง์์ ์ ๋ชฉ์์ผ ํผ๋๋ฐฑ ์์ฑ์ ์์ฑํจ๊ณผ ๋์์ ํด๋น ํผ๋๋ฐฑ์ด ์ด๋ค ์ ํ์ ์ค๋ฅ์ธ์ง ๋ถ๋ฅํ๋ ๋ฌธ์ ๋ฅผ ์ํํ๋ค. ์ด๋ ๋๋ฉ์ธ ์ง์์ด ๊ต์ ํผ๋๋ฐฑ ์์ฑ ๋จ๊ณ๊น์ง ์ ์ง๋๊ณ ํต์ ๊ฐ ๊ฐ๋ฅํ๋ค๋ ์ฅ์ ์ด ์๋ค๋ ๋ฐ์ ๊ทธ ์์๊ฐ ์๋ค.
๋ณธ ์ฐ๊ตฌ์์ ์ ์ํ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ ํ๊ฐํ๊ธฐ ์ํด์ 27๊ฐ์ ๋ชจ๊ตญ์ด๋ฅผ ๊ฐ๋ 217๋ช
์ ์ ์๋ฏธ ์ดํ ๋ฐํ 65,100๊ฐ๋ก ํผ๋๋ฐฑ ์๋ ์์ฑ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ ํ๋ จํ๊ณ , ๊ฐ์ ์ฌ๋ถ ๋ฐ ์ ๋์ ๋ํ ์ง๊ฐ ํ๊ฐ๋ฅผ ์ํํ์๋ค. ์ ์๋ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ ์ฌ์ฉํ์์ ๋ ํ์ต์ ๋ณธ์ธ์ ๋ชฉ์๋ฆฌ๋ฅผ ์ ์งํ ์ฑ ๊ต์ ๋ ๋ฐ์์ผ๋ก ๋ณํํ๋ ๊ฒ์ด ๊ฐ๋ฅํ๋ฉฐ, ์ ํต์ ์ธ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ธ ์๋์ด ๋๊ธฐ์ ์ค์ฒฉ๊ฐ์ฐ (Pitch-Synchronous Overlap-and-Add) ์๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ์ ์ฌ์ฉํ๋ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ์ ๋นํด ์๋ ๊ฐ์ ๋ฅ 16.67%์ด ํ์ธ๋์๋ค.Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1.1. Motivation 1
1.1.1. An Overview of CAPT Systems 3
1.1.2. Survey of existing Korean CAPT Systems 5
1.2. Problem Statement 7
1.3. Thesis Structure 7
Chapter 2. Pronunciation Analysis of Korean Produced by Chinese 9
2.1. Comparison between Korean and Chinese 11
2.1.1. Phonetic and Syllable Structure Comparisons 11
2.1.2. Phonological Comparisons 14
2.2. Related Works 16
2.3. Proposed Analysis Method 19
2.3.1. Corpus 19
2.3.2. Transcribers and Agreement Rates 22
2.4. Salient Pronunciation Variations 22
2.4.1. Segmental Variation Patterns 22
2.4.1.1. Discussions 25
2.4.2. Phonological Variation Patterns 26
2.4.1.2. Discussions 27
2.5. Summary 29
Chapter 3. Correlation Analysis of Pronunciation Variations and Human Evaluation 30
3.1. Related Works 31
3.1.1. Criteria used in L2 Speech 31
3.1.2. Criteria used in L2 Korean Speech 32
3.2. Proposed Human Evaluation Method 36
3.2.1. Reading Prompt Design 36
3.2.2. Evaluation Criteria Design 37
3.2.3. Raters and Agreement Rates 40
3.3. Linguistic Factors Affecting L2 Korean Accentedness 41
3.3.1. Pearsons Correlation Analysis 41
3.3.2. Discussions 42
3.3.3. Implications for Automatic Feedback Generation 44
3.4. Summary 45
Chapter 4. Corrective Feedback Generation for CAPT 46
4.1. Related Works 46
4.1.1. Prosody Transplantation 47
4.1.2. Recent Speech Conversion Methods 49
4.1.3. Evaluation of Corrective Feedback 50
4.2. Proposed Method: Corrective Feedback as a Style Transfer 51
4.2.1. Speech Analysis at Spectral Domain 53
4.2.2. Self-imitative Learning 55
4.2.3. An Analogy: CAPT System and GAN Architecture 57
4.3. Generative Adversarial Networks 59
4.3.1. Conditional GAN 61
4.3.2. CycleGAN 62
4.4. Experiment 63
4.4.1. Corpus 64
4.4.2. Baseline Implementation 65
4.4.3. Adversarial Training Implementation 65
4.4.4. Spectrogram-to-Spectrogram Training 66
4.5. Results and Evaluation 69
4.5.1. Spectrogram Generation Results 69
4.5.2. Perceptual Evaluation 70
4.5.3. Discussions 72
4.6. Summary 74
Chapter 5. Integration of Linguistic Knowledge in an Auxiliary Classifier CycleGAN for Feedback Generation 75
5.1. Linguistic Class Selection 75
5.2. Auxiliary Classifier CycleGAN Design 77
5.3. Experiment and Results 80
5.3.1. Corpus 80
5.3.2. Feature Annotations 81
5.3.3. Experiment Setup 81
5.3.4. Results 82
5.4. Summary 84
Chapter 6. Conclusion 86
6.1. Thesis Results 86
6.2. Thesis Contributions 88
6.3. Recommendations for Future Work 89
Bibliography 91
Appendix 107
Abstract in Korean 117
Acknowledgments 120Docto
Using Graph Mining Method in Analyzing Turkish Loanwords Derived from Arabic Language
ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ูู ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูุชู ูุชู
ููููุง ู
ู ูุบุฉ ุฅูู ุฃุฎุฑู ูุชุตุจุญ ุฌุฒุกูุง ุฃุณุงุณููุง ู
ู ูุบุฉ ุงูุงุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ. ุฌุงุกุช ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ู
ู ูุบุฉ ุงูู
ุตุฏุฑ ุฅูู ูุบุฉ ุงูู
ุณุชูู
ูุฃุณุจุงุจ ุนุฏูุฏุฉ. ุนูู ุณุจูู ุงูู
ุซุงู ูุง ุงูุญุตุฑ ุงูุบุฒูุงุช ุฃู ุงูู
ูู ุฃู ุงูุชุฌุงุฑุฉ. ุงู ุงูุฌุงุฏ ูุฐู ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ุจูู ุงููุบุงุช ุนู
ููุฉ ุตุนุจุฉ ูู
ุนูุฏุฉ ูุธุฑุง ูุงูู ูุงููุฌุฏ ู
ุนุงููุฑ ุซุงุจุชุฉ ูุชุญููู ุงูููู
ุงุช ุจูู ุงููุบุงุช ูุจุงูุชุงูู ุชููู ุงูุฏูุฉ ููููุฉ. ูู ูุฐุง ุงูุจุญุซ ุชู
ุชุญุณูู ุฏูุฉ ุงูุฌุงุฏ ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูุชุฑููุฉ ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ู
ู ุงููุบุฉ ุงูุนุฑุจูุฉ. ููุฐูู ุณูู ูุณุงูู
ูุฐุง ุงูุจุญุซ ุจุงูุฌุงุฏ ูู ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ุจุงุณุชุฎุฏุงู
ุงู ู
ุฌู
ูุนุฉ ู
ู ุงูุญุฑููู ุณูุงุกุง ูุงูุช ู
ุฑุชุจุฉ ุงู ุบูุฑ ู
ุฑุชุจุฉ ุงุจุฌุฏูุง. ุนุงูุฌ ูุฐุง ุงูุจุญุซ ู
ุดููุฉ ุงูุชุดููู ูู ุงููุทู ููุงู
ุจุงูุฌุงุฏ ุงูุญููู ููุญุฑูู ุงูู
ูููุฏุฉ ูู ุงููุบุฉ ุงูุชุฑููุฉ ูุงูู
ูุฌูุฏุฉ ูู ุงููุบุฉ ุงูุนุฑุจูุฉ. ุชูุฏู
ูุฐู ุงููุฑูุฉ ุทุฑููุฉ ู
ูุชุฑุญุฉ ูุชุญุฏูุฏ ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูุชุฑููุฉ ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ู
ู ุงููุบุฉ ุงูุนุฑุจูุฉ ุงุนุชู
ุงุฏูุง ุนูู ุชูููุงุช ุงูุชูููุจ ูู ุงูู
ุฎุทุทุงุช ูุงูุชู ุงุณุชุฎุฏู
ุช ูุงูู ู
ุฑุฉ ููุฐุง ุงูุบุฑุถ. ููุฏ ุชู
ุญู ู
ุดุงูู ุงูุงุฎุชูุงู ูู ุงูุญุฑูู ุจูู ุงููุบุชูู ุจุงุณุชุฎุฏุงู
ูุบุฉ ู
ุฑุฌุนูุฉ ููู ุงููุบุฉ ุงูุงููููุฒูุฉ ูุชูุญูุฏ ูู
ุท ูุดูู ุงูุญุฑูู. ููุฏ ุชู
ุงุฎุชุจุงุฑ ูุฐุง ุงููุธุงู
ุงูู
ูุชุฑุญ ุจุงุณุชุฎุฏุงู
1256 ููู
ุฉ. ุงููุชุงุฆุฌ ุงูุชู ุชู
ุงูุญุตูู ุนูููุง ุชุจูู ุงู ุงูุฏูุฉ ูู ุชุญุฏูุฏ ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ูุงูุช 0,99 ูุงูุชู ุชุนุชุจุฑ ููู
ุฉ ุนุงููุฉ ุฌุฏุง. ูู ูุฐู ุงูู
ุณุงูู
ุงุช ุชุคุฏู ุฅูู ุชูููู ุงูููุช ูุงูุฌูุฏ ูุชุญุฏูุฏ ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ุจุทุฑููุฉ ูุนุงูุฉ ูุฏูููุฉ. ูู
ุง ุฃู ุงูุจุงุญุซ ูุง ูุญุชุงุฌ ุฅูู ู
ุนุฑูุฉ ุจุงููุบุฉ ุงูู
ุณุชุนูุฑุฉ ูุงููุบุฉ ุงูู
ุฃุฎูุฐ ู
ููุง. ุนูุงูุฉ ุนูู ุฐูู ุ ูู
ูู ุชุนู
ูู
ูุฐู ุงูุทุฑููุฉ ุนูู ุฃู ูุบุชูู ุจุงุณุชุฎุฏุงู
ููุณ ุงูุฎุทูุงุช ุงูู
ุชุจุนุฉ ูู ุงูุญุตูู ุนูู ุงูููู
ุงุช ุงูู
ุณุชุนุงุฑุฉ ุงูุชุฑููุฉ ู
ู ุงูุนุฑุจูุฉ.Loanwords are the words transferred from one language to another, which become essential part of the borrowing language. The loanwords have come from the source language to the recipient language because of many reasons. Detecting these loanwords is complicated task due to that there are no standard specifications for transferring words between languages and hence low accuracy. This work tries to enhance this accuracy of detecting loanwords between Turkish and Arabic language as a case study. In this paper, the proposed system contributes to find all possible loanwords using any set of characters either alphabetically or randomly arranged. Then, it processes the distortion in the pronunciation, and solves the problem of the missing letters in Turkish language relative to Arabic language. A graph mining technique was introduced, for identifying the Turkish loanwords from Arabic language, which is used for the first time for this purpose. Also, the problem of letters differences, in the two languages, is solved by using a reference language (English) to unify the style of writing. The proposed system was tested using 1256 words that manually annotated. The obtained results showed that the f-measure is 0.99 which is high value for such system. Also, all these contributions lead to decrease time and effort to identify the loanwords in efficient and accurate way. Moreover, researchers do not need to have knowledge in the recipient and the source languages. In addition, this method can be generalized to any two languages using the same steps followed in obtaining Turkish loanwords from Arabic
Automatic Pronunciation Assessment -- A Review
Pronunciation assessment and its application in computer-aided pronunciation
training (CAPT) have seen impressive progress in recent years. With the rapid
growth in language processing and deep learning over the past few years, there
is a need for an updated review. In this paper, we review methods employed in
pronunciation assessment for both phonemic and prosodic. We categorize the main
challenges observed in prominent research trends, and highlight existing
limitations, and available resources. This is followed by a discussion of the
remaining challenges and possible directions for future work.Comment: 9 pages, accepted to EMNLP Finding
Recognizing Speech in a Novel Accent: The Motor Theory of Speech Perception Reframed
The motor theory of speech perception holds that we perceive the speech of
another in terms of a motor representation of that speech. However, when we
have learned to recognize a foreign accent, it seems plausible that recognition
of a word rarely involves reconstruction of the speech gestures of the speaker
rather than the listener. To better assess the motor theory and this
observation, we proceed in three stages. Part 1 places the motor theory of
speech perception in a larger framework based on our earlier models of the
adaptive formation of mirror neurons for grasping, and for viewing extensions
of that mirror system as part of a larger system for neuro-linguistic
processing, augmented by the present consideration of recognizing speech in a
novel accent. Part 2 then offers a novel computational model of how a listener
comes to understand the speech of someone speaking the listener's native
language with a foreign accent. The core tenet of the model is that the
listener uses hypotheses about the word the speaker is currently uttering to
update probabilities linking the sound produced by the speaker to phonemes in
the native language repertoire of the listener. This, on average, improves the
recognition of later words. This model is neutral regarding the nature of the
representations it uses (motor vs. auditory). It serve as a reference point for
the discussion in Part 3, which proposes a dual-stream neuro-linguistic
architecture to revisits claims for and against the motor theory of speech
perception and the relevance of mirror neurons, and extracts some implications
for the reframing of the motor theory
- โฆ