The Nijmegen Corpus of Casual French

Speech Communication

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 201-212

  Torreira, Francisco ^a,b   Adda Decker, Martine ^c   Ernestus, Mirjam ^a,b  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

^c CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Casual speech; Corpus; French

Indexed keywords

DISFLUENCIES; ORTHOGRAPHIC TRANSCRIPTION; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; SPECIFIC TASKS; SPEECH CORPORA;

ESTERIFICATION; ESTERS;

SOFTWARE AGENTS;

EID: 73649147671     PISSN: 01676393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.specom.2009.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Armstrong N., and Smith A. The influence of linguistic and social factors on the recent decline of French ne. J. French Lang. Studies 12 01 (2002) 23-41
2. Barras C., Geoffrois E., Wu Z., and Liberman M. Transcriber: development and use of a tool for assisting speech corpora production. Speech Comm. 33 1-2 (2001) 5-22
3. Blanche-Benveniste, C., 1990. Le français parlé, études grammaticales. Éditions du CNRS, Paris.
4. Boersma, P., Weenink, D., 2009. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (version 5.1.18) [Computer program]. Retrieved October 9, 2009. .
5. Clark H. Using Language (1996), Cambridge University Press
6. Clark H., and Wasow T. Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychol. 37 (1998) 201-242
7. Coveney, A.B., 1996. Variability in Spoken French. A Sociolingistic Study of Interrogation and Negation. Elm Bank, Exeter.
8. Development Core Team, 2008. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. .
9. Durand, J., Laks, B., Lyche, C., 2005. Un corpus numérisé pour la phonologie du français. In: Williams, G., (Ed.), La linguistique de corpus, Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes, pp. 205-217.
10. Eggins, S., Slade, D., 1997. Analysing Casual Conversation. Cassell.
11. Ernestus, M., 2000. Voice assimilation and segment reduction in Dutch: A corpus-based study of the phonology-phonetics interface. LOT, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
12. Fagyal, Z., 1998. Le retour du e final en français parisien: changement phonétique conditionné par la prosodie. In: Englebert, A., Pierrard, M., Rosier, L., van Raemdonck, D. (Eds.), Vivacité et diversité de la variation linguistique, Vol. 3. Max Niemeyer Verlag, pp. 151-160.
13. Galliano, S., Geoffrois, E., Mostefa, D., Choukri, K., Bonastre, J.-F., Gravier, J., 2005. ESTER Phase II evaluation campaign for the rich transcription of French broadcast newshase II Evaluation campaign for the rich transcription of French broadcast news. In: Proc. Interspeech 2005, pp. 2453-2456.
14. Gauvain, J.-L., Adda, G., Adda-Decker, M., Allauzen, A., Gendner, V., Lamel, L., Schwenk, H., 2005. Where are we in transcribing French broadcast news? In: Proc. Interspeech 2005.
15. Johnson, K., 2004. Massive reduction in conversational American English. In: Yoneyama, K., Maekawa, K. (Eds.), Spontaneous Speech: Data and Analysis. Proc. 1st Session of the 10th Internat. Symposium, The National International Institute for Japanese Language, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 29-54.
16. Jousse, V., Estève, Y., Béchet, F., Bazillon, T., Linares, G., 2008. Caractérisation et détection de parole spontanée dans de larges collections de documents audio. JEP 2008, Avignon.
17. Lamel L., Rosset S., Gauvain J.L., Bennacef S., Garnier-Rizet M., and Prouts B. The LIMSI ARISE system. Speech Comm. 31 4 (2000) 339-354
18. Le Nouveau Petit Robert 2008 Grand Format, 2007. Editions Le Robert.
19. Local J. Variable domains and variable relevance: interpreting phonetic exponents. J. Phonetics 31 (2003) 321-339
20. Local, J., 2007. Phonetic detail and the organisation of talk-in-interaction. In: Proc. XVIth Internat. Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Saarbruecken, 16th ICPhS Organizing Committee, Germany.
21. Moore, R.K., 2003. A comparison of the data requirements of automatic speech recognition systems and human listeners. In: Proc. Eurospeech-2003, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 2581-2584.
22. Moore, R.K., 2005. Cognitive informatics: the future of spoken language processing? In: Proc. 10th Internat. Conf. Speech and Computer, Patras, Greece.
23. Plug L. From words to actions: the phonetics of eigenlijk in two communicative contexts. Phonetica 62 (2005) 131-145
24. Sarkar D. Lattice: Multivariate Data Visualization with R (2008), Springer
25. Schegloff E.A. Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Lang. Soc. 29 1 (2000) 1-63
26. Serpollet, N., Bergounioux, G., Chesneau, A., Walter, R., 2007. A large reference corpus for spoken French: ESLO 1 and 2 and its variations. In: Proc. from Corpus Linguistics Conference Series, University of Birmingham.
27. Shriberg E. To 'errrr' is human: ecology and acoustics of speech disfluencies. J. Internat. Phonetic Assoc. 31 1 (2001) 153-169
28. Tree J.E.F. The effects of false starts and repetitions on the processing of subsequent words in spontaneous speech. J. Memory Lang. 34 (1995) 709-738
29. Valdman A. La langue des faubourgs et des banlieues: de l'argot au français populaire. French Rev. 73 6 (2000) 1179-1192