Heterogeneous relation graphs as a formalism for representing linguistic information

Speech Communication

Volumn 33, Issue 1-2, 2001, Pages 153-174

  Taylor, Paul ^a   Black, Alan W ^a   Caley, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA STRUCTURES; GRAPH THEORY; LINGUISTICS; MATRIX ALGEBRA; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH CODING;

HETEROGENEOUS RELATION GRAPHS (HRG);

SPEECH SYNTHESIS;

EID: 0035155093     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6393(00)00074-1     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bailly, G., Tran, A., 1989. Compost: A rule compiler for speech synthesis. In: Eurospeech 89, pp. 136-139.
2. Beckman M.E., Pierrehumbert J.B. Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook. 3:1986;255-309.
3. Bird, S., Liberman, M., 1999. A formal framework for linguistic annotation. Technical Report CIS-99-01, University of Pennsylvania.
4. Black, A.W., Taylor, P.A., 1994. CHATR: A generic speech synthesis system. In: COLING '94. Kyoto, Japan, pp. 983-986.
5. Black, A.W., Taylor, P., Caley, R., 1996-2000. The Festival speech synthesis system. Manual and source code avaliable at http://www.cstr.ed.ac.uk/projects/festival.html.
6. Boves L. Considerations in the design of a multi-lingual text-to-speech system. Journal of Phonetics. 19(1):1991;309-327.
7. Cassidy, S., Harrington, J., 1996. Emu: an enhanced hierarchical speech data management system. In: SST-96, Sixth International Australian Conference in Speech Science and Technology. Adelaide, pp. 361-366.
8. Chomsky N., Halle M. The Sound Pattern of English. 1968;Harper and Row, New York.
9. Dutoit T. An Introduction to Text to Speech Synthesis. 1997;Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
10. Goldsmith J. Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. 1990;Blackwell, Oxford.
11. Hertz, S.R., 1990. The Delta programming language: an integrated approach to non-linear phonology phonetics and speech synthesis. In: Kingston, J., Beckman, M.E. (Eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, London, pp. 215-257.
12. Ladd, D.R., 1992. Compound prosodic domains. Edinburgh University Linguistics Department Ocassional Paper.
13. Liberman, M., 1975. The Intonational system of English. Ph.D. thesis, MIT. Published by Indiana University Linguistics Club.
14. Local, J., 1992. Modelling assimilation in a non-segmental rule-free phonology. In: Docherty, G.J., Ladd, D.R. (Eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, London, 2, pp. 190-223.
15. Selkirk E.O. Phonology and Syntax. 1984;MIT Press, Cambridge.
16. Sproat R. Multilingual text analysis for text-to-speech synthesis. Journal of Natural Language Engineering. 2(4):1996;369-380.
17. Sproat, R., Olive, J., 1994. A modular architecture for multi-lingual text-to-speech. In: Proceedings of the Second ESCA/IEEE Workshop on Speech Synthesis. New York, pp. 187-190.
18. Taylor, P.A., Black, A.W., 1999. Speech synthesis by phonological structure matching. In: Eurospeech 99, pp. 623-626.
19. Taylor, P., Caley, R., Black, A.W., King, S., 1996-2000. The Edinburgh speech tools library. Manual and source code avaliable at http://www.cstr.ed.ac.uk/projects/speech tools.html.
20. Traber, C., 1995. The implementation of a text-to-speech system for German. Ph.D. thesis, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.
21. van Coile, B.M.J., 1989. The DEPES development tool for linguistic rules. In: ICASSP 89, pp. 250-253.
22. van Leeuwen H.C. A development tool for linguistic rules. Computer Speech and Language. 3:1989;83-104.