Диссертация (1148476), страница 24
Текст из файла (страница 24)
— № 3. — P. 281–290.59.Hockey,B.A.PhonemicLengthandPre-BoundaryLengthening:Anexperimental investigation on the use of durational cues in Hungarian. / B.A.Hockey, Z. Fagyal // Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress ofPhonetic Sciences. — San Francisco. — P. 313–316.60.Hockey, B.A. Pre-boundary lengthening: Universal or language specific? Thecase of Hungarian. / B.A. Hockey, Z. Fagyal // Proceedings of the 22nd AnnualPenn Linguistics Colloquium.
— Philadelphia, USA, 1998. — P. 71–82.61.Hofhuis, E.M.F.J. Final lengthening at prosodic boundaries in Dutch. / E.M.F.J.Hofhuis, C. Gussenhoven, T. Rietveld // Proceedings of the XIIIth InternationalCongress of Phonetic Sciences. — Stockholm: Stockholm University, 1995.
—Vol. 1. — P. 154–157.62.Horne, M. Prosodic Boundary Strength In Swedish: Final Lengthening AndSilent Interval Duration. / M. Horne, E. Strangert, M. Heldner // Proceedings ofthe XIIIth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. — Stockholm: KTH andStockholm University, 1995. — Vol. 1. — P. 170–173.63.Jing, J.-Y. The influence of speaking rates and utterance units on segmentalduration of Mandarin speech. / J.-Y. Jing // The Journal of the Acoustical Societyof America.
2004. — Vol. 116. — № 4. — P. 2628–2628.64.Jones, M. Using relative duration in large vocabulary speech recognition. / M.Jones, P.C. Woodland // Proceedings of the Third European Conference on160Speech Communication and Technology, EUROSPEECH 1993. — Berlin, 1993.— Vol. 1. — P. 311–314.65.Kachkovskaia, T. Final lengthening in Russian: a corpus-based study. / T.Kachkovskaia, N. Volskaya, P.
Skrelin // Proceedings of INTERSPEECH-2013.— ISCA, 2013. — P. 1438–1442.66.Kachkovskaia, T. Phrase-Final Segment Lengthening in Russian: PreliminaryResults of a Corpus-Based Study. / T. Kachkovskaia, N. Volskaya // Speech andComputer / Eds. Železný M., Habernal I., Ronzhin A. — Springer InternationalPublishing, 2013. — P. 257–263.67.Keating, P. Domain-Initial Articulatory Strengthening in Four Languages.
/ P.Keating, T. Cho, C. Fougeron, C. Hsu // Phonetic Interpretation (Papers inLaboratory Phonology 6). — Cambridge University Press, 2003. — P. 143–161.68.Keller, E. The prediction of prosodic timing: Rules for final syllable lengtheningin French. / E. Keller, B. Zellner // Proceedings of an ESCA Workshop onProsody. — Lund, Sweden, 1993. — P. 212–215.69.Klatt, D. Vowel lengthening is syntactically determined in a connected discourse./ D.
Klatt // Journal of Phonetics. 1975. — Vol. 3. — P. 129–140.70.Klatt, D.H. Generative Theory of Segmental Duration in English. / D.H. Klatt //The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1972. — Vol. 51. — № 1A. —P. 101–101.71.Klatt, D.H. Interaction between two factors that influence vowel duration. / D.H.Klatt // The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1973. — Vol. 54. — №4. — P. 1102–1104.72.Klatt, D.H. Linguistic uses of segmental duration in English: Acoustic andperceptual evidence. / D.H. Klatt // The Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. 1976. — Vol.
59. — № 5. — P. 1208–1221.73.Klatt, D.H. Review of text-to-speech conversion for English. / D.H. Klatt // TheJournal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1987. — Vol. 82. — № 3. — P.737–793.16174.Kohler, K.J. Prosodic Boundary Signals in German. / K.J. Kohler // Phonetica.1983. — Vol.
40. — № 2. — P. 89–134.75.Kruskal, W. Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis. / W. Kruskal, A.Wallis // Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1952. — Vol. 47. — №260. — P. 583–621.76.Laver, J. Principles of Phonetics. / J. Laver. — Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1994. — 707 p.77.Lehiste, I. Role of duration in disambiguating syntactically ambiguous sentences./ I. Lehiste, J.P. Olive, L.A. Streeter // The Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica.
1976. — Vol. 60. — № 5. — P. 1199–1202.78.Lehiste, I. Suprasegmentals. / I. Lehiste. — Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press,1977. — 194 p.79.Lehmann, E.L. Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks. / E.L.Lehmann, H.J.M. D’Abrera. 1st ed. 1975. Revised edition 2006 edition. — NewYork: Springer, 2006. — 464 p.80.Levelt, W.J.M. Speaking: from intention to articulation. / W.J.M.
Levelt. —Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1993. — 566 p.81.Martin, J.G. On judging pauses in spontaneous speech. / J.G. Martin // Journal ofVerbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1970. — Vol. 9. — № 1. — P. 75–78.82.Mertens, P.Towards automatic detection of prosodic boundaries in spokenFrench. / P. Mertens, A.C. Simon // Proceedings of the Prosody-DiscourseInterface Conference. — Leuven, Belgium, 2013. — P.
81–87.83.Miller Jr, R.G. Beyond ANOVA: Basics of Applied Statistics. / R.G. Miller Jr. —London; New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 1997. — 336 p.84.Nakai, S. Quantity constraints on the temporal implementation of phrasal prosodyin Northern Finnish. / S. Nakai, A. Turk, K. Suomi, S.
Granlund, R. Ylitalo, S.Kunnari // Journal of Phonetics. 2012. — Vol. 40. — № 6. — P. 796–807.16285.Nakai, S. Utterance-final lengthening and quantity in Northern Finnish. / S.Nakai, S. Kunnari, A. Turk, K. Suomi, R. Ylitalo, // Journal of Phonetics. 2009.— Т. 37. — № 1. — С. 29–45.86.Nelson, D.G.K. The head-turn preference procedure for testing auditoryperception. / D.G.K. Nelson, P.W. Jusczyk // Infant Behavior and Development.1995. — № 1.
— P. 111–116.87.Nespor, M. Prosodic Phonology. / M. Nespor, I. Vogel. — Berlin, Boston: DeGruyter Mouton, 2012. — 327 p.88.Nooteboom, S.G. Production and perception of vowel length in spoken sentences./ S.G. Nooteboom, G.J. Doodeman // The Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. 1980.
— Vol. 67. — № 1. — P. 276–287.89.O’Malley, M. Recovering parentheses from spoken algebraic expressions. / M.O’Malley, D. Kloker, B. Dara-Abrams // IEEE Transactions on Audio andElectroacoustics. 1973. — Vol. 21. — № 3. — P. 217–220.90.O’Shaughnessy, D. A multispeaker analysis of durations in read Frenchparagraphs. / D. O’Shaughnessy // The Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. 1984. — Vol.
76. — № 6. — P. 1664–1672.91.Oller, D.K. The effect of position in utterance on speech segment duration inEnglish. / D.K. Oller // The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1973.— Vol. 54. — № 5. — P. 1235–1247.92.Ormel, E. Prosodic Correlates of Sentences in Signed Languages: A LiteratureReview and Suggestions for New Types of Studies. / E.
Ormel, O. Crasborn //Sign Language Studies. 2012. — Vol. 12. — № 2. — P. 279–315.93.Ostendorf, M. The Use of Relative Duration in Syntactic Disambiguation. / M.Ostendorf, P.J. Price, J. Bear, C.W. Wightman // Proceedings of the Workshop onSpeech and Natural Language. — Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association forComputational Linguistics, 1990. — P. 26–31.16394.Peterson, G.E. Duration of Syllable Nuclei in English. / G.E. Peterson, I. Lehiste// The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1960.
— Vol. 32. — № 6. —P. 693–703.95.Pijper, J.R. de. On the perceptual strength of prosodic boundaries and its relationto suprasegmental cues. / J.R. de Pijper, A.A. Sanderman // The Journal of theAcoustical Society of America. 1994. — Vol. 96. — № 4. — P. 2037–2047.96.Plüschke, M. The domain of phrase-final lengthening in Estonian. / M. Plüschke,J. Harrington // Nordic Prosody. Proceedings of the XIth Conference / Eds. Asu,E.L., Lippus P. — Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York,Oxford, Wien, 2013. — P.
293–302.97.Price, P.J. Prosody and Parsing. / P.J. Price, M. Ostendorf, C.W. Wightman //Proceedings of the Workshop on Speech and Natural Language. — Stroudsburg,PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics, 1989. — P. 5–11.98.Rao, R. Final Lengthening and Pause Duration in Three Dialects of Spanish. / R.Rao // Selected Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Laboratory Approaches toSpanish Phonology / Eds.
Marta Ortega-Llebaria. — Somerville, MA, USA:Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 2010. — P. 69–82.99.Shapiro, S.S. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). / S.S.Shapiro, M.B. Wilk // Biometrika. 1965. — Vol. 52. — № 3-4. — P. 591–611.100.Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. A prosody tutorial for investigators of auditorysentence processing. / S. Shattuck-Hufnagel, A.E. Turk // Journal ofPsycholinguistic Research. 1996. — Vol. 25.
— № 2. — P. 193–247.101.Shepherd, M.A. The scope and effects of preboundary prosodiclengthening in Japanese. / M.A. Shepherd // USC Working Papers in Linguistics.2008. — Vol. 4. — P. 1–14.102.Skrelin, P. CORPRES. / P. Skrelin, N.B. Volskaya, D. Kocharov, K.Evgrafova, O. Glotova, V. Evdokimova. // Text, Speech and Dialogue / Eds.Sojka P. et al. — Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. — P.
392–399.164103.Skrelin, P.A. A Fully Annotated Corpus of Russian Speech. / P.A. Skrelin,N.B. Volskaya, D. Kocharov, K. Evgrafova, O. Glotova, V. Evdokimova //Proceedings of the Seventh conference on International Language Resources andEvaluation (LREC’10). — European Language Resources Association (ELRA),2010.
— P. 109–112.104.Snow, D. Phrase-final syllable lengthening and intonation in early childspeech. / D. Snow // J Speech Hear Res. 1994. — Vol. 37. — № 4. — P. 831–840.105.Streeter, L.A. Acoustic determinants of phrase boundary perception. / L.A.Streeter // The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1978. — Vol. 64. —№ 6.
— P. 1582–1592.106.Suomi, K. Finnish Sound Structure: Phonetics, Phonology, Phonotacticsand Prosody. / K. Suomi, J. Toivanen, R. Ylitalo. — University of Oulu, 2008. —149 p.107.Tabain, M. Effects of prosodic boundary on /aC/ sequences: acousticresults. / M. Tabain // The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2003. —Vol. 113. — № 1. — P. 516–531.108.Trouvain, J. Tempo Variation in Speech Production: Implications forSpeech Synthesis. / J.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
