Inter-transcriber reliability for two systems of prosodic annotation: ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) and RaP (Rhythm and Pitch)

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 277-312

  Breen, Mara ^a   Dilley, Laura C ^b   Kraemer, John ^c   Gibson, Edward ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Inter transcriber reliability; Prosodic annotation; Prosody; RaP; ToBI

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871413111     PISSN: 16137027     EISSN: 16137035     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/cllt-2012-0011     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Arvaniti, Amalia, D. Robert Ladd & Ineke Mennen. 1998. Stability of tonal alignment: the case of Greek prenuclear accents. Journal of Phonetics 26. 3-25.
2. Arvaniti, Amalia, D. Robert Ladd & Ineke Mennen. 2000. What is a starred tone? Evidence from Greek. In Papers in Laboratory Phonology V (pp. 119-130): Cambridge University Press.
3. Bartels, Christine, & John Kingston. 1994. Salient pitch cues in the perception of contrastive f ocus. In Peter Bosch & Rob van der Sandt (eds.), Focus and Natural Language Processing: Proceedings of the Journal of Semantics Conference on Focus: IBM Working Papers, TR-80.94-006.
4. Beaver, David, Brady Clark, Edward Flemming, Florian Jaeger & Maria Wolters. 2007. When semantics meets phonetics: acoustical studies of second occurrence focus. Language 83. 245-276.
5. Beckman, Mary E. & Gail Ayers Elam. 1997. Guidelines for ToBI labeling, version 3: Ohio State University.
6. Beckman, Mary E. & Julia Hirschberg, 1994. The ToBI annotation conventions. The Ohio State University and AT&T Bell Laboratories, unpublished manuscript. Available at ftp://ftp.ling.ohio-state.edu/pub/ phonetics/TOBI/ToBI/ToBI.6.html (accessed 8 March 2011).
7. Beckman, Mary E., Julia Hirschberg & Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel. 2005. The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In Sun-Ah Jun. (ed.), Prosodic Typology: The Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing, 9-54. Oxford University Press.
8. Beckman, Mary E. & Janet Pierrehumbert. 1986. Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook 3 255-309.
9. Braun, Bettina. 2006. Phonetics and phonology of thematic contrast in German. Language and Speech, 49 (4) 451-493.
10. Brugos, Alejna, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel & Nanette Veilleux. 2006. Transcribing prosodic structure of spoken utterances with ToBI (MIT open course ware), http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6- 911-transcribing-prosodic-structure-of-spokenutterances-with-tobi-january-iap- 2006/ (accessed 9 March 2011).
11. Brugos, Alejna, Nanette Veilleux, Mara Breen & Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel. 2008. The Alternatives (Alt) tier for ToBI: advantages of capturing prosodic ambiguity. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody. Campinas, Brazil.
12. Calhoun, Sasha. 2006. Information structure and the prosodic structure of English: A probabilistic relationship. Edinburgh, Scotland: University of Edinburgh dissertation.
13. Carletta, Jean. 1996. Assessing agreement on classifcation tasks: the Kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics 22 (2). 249-254.
14. Choi, Jeung-Yoon, Mark Hasegawa-Johnson & Jennifer Cole. 2005. Finding intonational boundaries using acoustic cues related to the voice source. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 118 (4). 2579-2587.
15. Cutler, Anne, & Dennis Norris. 1988. The role of strong syllables in segmentation for lexical a ccess. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 14. 113-121.
16. Dilley, Laura C. 2005. The phonetics and phonology of tonal systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT d issertation.
17. Dilley, Laura C. 2007. Pitch range variation in English tonal contrasts: Continuous or categorical? In Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Saarbrücken, Germany.
18. Dilley, Laura C. 2010. Pitch range variation in English tonal contrasts is continuous, not c ategorical. Phonetica 67. 6-81.
19. Dilley, Laura C. submitted. The role of F0 alignment in distinguishing categories in American English intonation.
20. Dilley, Laura C., Mara Breen, Marti Bolivar, John Kraemer & Edward Gibson. 2006. A comparison of inter-transcriber reliability for two systems of prosodic annotation: RaP (Rhythm and Pitch) and ToBI (Tones and Break Indices). In Proceedings of Interspeech. Pittsburgh, PA.
21. Dilley, Laura C. & Meredith Brown. 2005. The RaP (Rhythm and Pitch) Labeling System, Version 1.0: Available at http://tedlab.mit.edu/tedlab-website/ RaPHome.html (accessed 9 March 2011).
22. Dilley, Laura C. Meredith Brown. 2007. Effects of pitch range variation on F0 extrema in an imitation task. Journal of Phonetics 35. 523-551.
23. Dilley, Laura C., D. Robert Ladd & Astrid Schepman. 2005. Alignment of L and H in bitonal pitch accents: Testing two hypotheses. Journal of Phonetics 33 (1). 115-119.
24. Duez, Danielle. 1993. Acoustic correlates of subjective pauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic R esearch 22. 21-39.
25. Goldsmith, John. 1976. Autosegmental phonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
26. Greenberg, Steven, Hannah Carvey, & Leah Hitchcock. 2002. The relationship between stress a ccent and pronunciation variation in spontaneous American English discourse. In Proceedings of the ISCA Workshop on Prosody and Speech Processing, 56-61.
27. Halliday, Michael A. K. 1967. Intonation and Grammar in British English. Paris: Mouton.
28. Hirst, Daniel, & Albert Di Cristo. 1998. Intonation systems. A survey of twenty languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.). 2005. Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Kochanski, Greg, Esther Grabe, John Coleman & Burton Rosner. 2005. Loudness predicts prominence: fundamental frequency lends little. Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 118. 1038-1054.
31. Krippendorff, Klaus. 1980. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology: Sage P ublications.
32. Ladd, D. Robert. 1996. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Ladd, D. Robert. 2000. Tones and turning points: Bruce, Pierrehumbert, and the elements of intonational phonology. In Merle Horne (ed.), Prosody: Theory and Experiment - Studies presented to Gosta Bruce, 37-50. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
34. Ladd, D. Robert, Dan Faulkner, Hanneke Faulkner & Astrid Schepman. 1999. Constant "segmental anchoring" of F0 movements under changes in speech rate. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106 (3). 1543-1554.
35. Ladd, D. Robert, Ineke Mennen, & Astrid Schepman. 2000. Phonological conditioning of peak alignment in rising pitch accents in Dutch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107 (5). 2685-2696.
36. Ladd, D. Robert, & Astrid Schepman. 2003. "Sagging transitions" between high accent peaks in English: experimental evidence. Journal of Phonetics 31. 81-112.
37. Landis, J. Richard & Gary G. Koch. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33. 159-174.
38. Liberman, Mark. 1975. The intonation system of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
39. Nazzi, Thierry, & Franck Ramus. 2003. Perception and acquisition of linguistic rhythm by infants. Speech Communication 41. 233-243.
40. Pierrehumbert, Janet. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.
41. Pierrehumbert, Janet & Mary E. Beckman. 1988. Japanese Tone Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Pierrehumbert, Janet & Julia Hirschberg. 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Phillip R. Cohen, Jerry Morgan & Martha E. Pollack (eds.), Intentions in Communications, 271-311. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Pierrehumbert, Janet, & Shirley Steele. 1989. Categories of tonal alignment in English. Phonetica, 46. 181-196.
44. Pitrelli, John, Mary E. Beckman & Julia Hirschberg. 1994. Evaluation of prosodic transcription labeling reliability in the ToBI framework. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, 123-126.
45. Price, Patti, Mari Ostendorf, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel & Cynthia Fong. 1991. The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 90 (6). 2956-2970.
46. Redi, Laura. C. 2003. Categorical effects in production of pitch contours in English. In Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences, 1647-1650. Barcelona.
47. Rietveld, Anthony, & Roeland van Hout. 1993. Statistical techniques for the study of language and language behavior: Mouton de Gruyter.
48. Rouas, J.-L., Farinas, J., Pelligrino, F., & Andre-Obrecht, R. (2003). Modeling prosody for language identifcation on read and spontaneous speech. In International conference on Multimedia and Expo (pp. 753-756).
49. Salverda, Anne Pier, Delphine Dahan & James McQueen. 2003. The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition 90. 51-89.
50. Shattuck-Hufnagel, Stefanie, Laura C. Dilley, Nanette Veilleux, Alejna Brugos, & Rob Speer. 2004. F0 peaks and valleys aligned with non-prominent syllables can infuence perceived prominence in adjacent syllables. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2004. Nara, Japan.
51. Silverman, Kim, Mary Beckman, John Pitrelli, Mari Ostendorf, Colin Wightman, Patti Price, Janet Pierrehumbert, & Julia Hirschberg. 1992. ToBI: A standard scheme for labeling prosody. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (pp. 867-879). Banff.
52. Silverman, Kim & Janet Pierrehumbert. 1990. The timing of prenuclear high accents in English. In John Kingston & Mary Beckman (eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology I: Between the Grammar and Physics of Speech. 71-106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. Syrdal, Ann K. & Julia McGory. 2000. Inter-transcriber reliability of ToBI prosodic labeling. Paper presented at the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Beijing, C hina.
54. Watson, Duane, Jennifer Arnold & Michael K. Tanenhaus. 2008. Tic Tac TOE: Effects of predictability and importance on acoustic prominence in language production. Cognition 106. 1548-1557.
55. *. Cognitive Science 32. 1232-1244.
56. Wightman, Colin. 2002. ToBI or not ToBI? In Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2002. Aix-en-Provence, France.
57. Wightman, Colin, Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, Mari Ostendorf & Patti Price. 1992. Segmental durations in the vicinity of prosodic phrase boundaries. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91 (3). 1707-1717.
58. Yoon, Tae-Jin, Sandra Chavarria, Jennifer Cole & Mark Hasegawa-Johnson. 2004. I ntertranscriber reliability of prosodic labeling on telephone conversation using ToBI. Paper presented at the Interspeech 2004 Conference, Jeju Island, Korea.