Three dimensions of sentence prosody

语音合成已经取得了长足的进步。今天的计算机可以非常准确地产生单词和句子，但如果计算机读出一个新的文本，结果往往仍然很难听懂。一个主要原因是我们对句子韵律缺乏理解。句子韵律可以被描述为话语的所有声学属性，这些属性不是它所包含的单词的函数，而是由于其他因素，并且包括三个独立的维度：语调(例如，断言时的降调与问题时的升调)、短语(句子组中的单词聚集在一起的方式)和突出(例如，高度可预测的或语篇给定的单词通常被减少，而对比信息被增强)。句子韵律的这三个维度(语调、短语、突出度)部分取决于特定语言的语音表征(例如，法语发音与英语不同的陈述语调)，部分取决于口语过程中在线加工的直接反映(例如，复杂成分之前往往有短语连接)。一旦我们理解了表征性问题，并能够解开这三个维度，句子韵律就可以作为了解言语产生的认知机制的窗口。这一建议汇集了我的实验室过去参与的几个方面的研究。更好地理解句子韵律的第一步是将信号中提到的三个维度分开。句法和语义功能(言语行为的类型、组合、对比)是相互垂直的，但它们的韵律关系(音调、短语、突出度)是否存在争议仍存在争议。大多数当前的句子韵律模型都假设相互作用，甚至将维度混为一谈。然而，假设的维度之间的相互作用的现实还没有系统地建立起来。在我的实验室(Wagner&McAuliffe 2017，InterSpeech)针对这一建议进行的初步研究，在析因言语产生实验中系统地跨越了三个功能维度(言语行为、句法、对比)。结果表明，一旦我们考虑了其他维度的贡献，以及说话人的差异，我们实际上可以相当可靠地从说话人的话语中恢复出韵律的三个维度。虽然我们发现有限的相互作用，但它们实际上并不是当前模型所预测的。这个项目由一系列的生产和感知实验组成，旨在建立真实的交互作用，并开发更合适的表征模型。我们使用新的工具(例如，在我的实验室开发的蒙特利尔强制校准器，McAuliffe等人)。2017，InterSpeech)和统计建模，以开发能够解开维度的模型，就像人类在处理语音时所做的那样。

Speech synthesis has come a long way. Today's computers can produce words and sentences highly accurately, but if a computer reads out a novel text, the result is still often hard to listen to. A major reason is our lack of understanding of sentence prosody. Sentence prosody can be characterized as all those acoustic properties of an utterance that are not a function of the words it contains, but rather are due to other factors, and includes three separate dimensions: Intonation (e.g., falling intonation on assertions vs. rising intonation on questions), Phrasing (the way the words in a sentence group together), and Prominence (for example highly predictable or discourse given words are often reduced, while contrastive information is boosted). These three dimensions of sentence prosody (intonation, phrasing, prominence) are partly determined by the phonological representations of a particular language (e.g., declarative intonation in French sounds different than in English) and partly a direct reflex of on-line processing during speaking (e.g., complex constituents are often preceded by phrasing junctures). Once we understand the representational questions and can disentangle the three dimensions, sentence prosody can be used as a window into cognitive mechanisms underlying speech production. This proposal brings together several strands of research that my lab has contributed to in the past.******The first step to a better understanding of sentence prosody is to disentangle the three mentioned dimensions in the signal. The syntactic and semantic functions (type of speech act, grouping, contrast) are orthogonal to each other, but whether their prosodic correlates (tune, phrasing, prominence) are remains controversial. Most current models of sentence prosody assume interactions or even conflate the dimensions. However, the reality of the assumed interactions between the dimensions has not been systematically established. An initial study, conducted for this proposal in my lab (Wagner & McAuliffe 2017, Interspeech), systematically crossed the three functional dimensions (speech act, syntax, contrast) in a factorial speech production experiment. The results show that we can in fact recover the three `dimensions' of prosody quite reliably from speakers' utterances, once we factor out the contribution of the other dimensions, as well as speaker differences. While we find limited interactions, they are not actually the ones that current models predict. This project consists of a series of production and perception experiments designed to establish the true interactions, and develops a more appropriate representational model. We make use of novel tools (e.g, The Montreal Forced Aligner, developed in my lab, Mcauliffe et al. 2017, Interspeech) and statistical modelling, to develop models that can disentangle the dimensions, just as humans do when processing speech.**