Human spoken language production is directed towards communication delivering comprehensible information to recipients. Speech segmentation into small units efficiently enhances a sensible and interpretable discourse structure. Such processing units in real-life communication may be applied to semantic, syntactic, or prosodic structures. Previous studies have proposed various theories of speech segmentation, mainly based on qualitative analyses. The present study utilizes corpus-based quantitative data to examine how conversational speech in French and Mandarin is structured in terms of three different processing units, and how these units interact with one another. Unit completion location was identified by semantic structure (discourse unit), prosodic pattern (prosodic unit), and sequences of parts of speech (chunk). Quantitative analyses for both languages were carried out by applying comparable processing procedures. This article presents our efforts to establish a dataset for two typologically diverse languages, and to carry out quantitative comparative studies of processing units in face-to-face conversation.
AbneySteven P.1991. Parsing by chunks. Principle-based Parsing: Computation and Psycholinguistics, ed. by BerwickRobert C.AbneySteven P.TennyCarol, 257–278. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
2.
AfantenosStergosAsherNicholasBenamaraFarahBrasMyriamFabreCécileHo-dacMaiLe DraoulecAnneMullerPhilippePéry-WoodleyMarie-PaulePrévotLaurentRebeyrolleJosetteTanguyLudovicVergez-CouretMarianneVieuLaure. 2012. An empirical resource for discovering cognitive principles of discourse organisation: the ANNODIS corpus. Proceedings of LREC 2012, 2727–2734. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/836_Paper.pdf.
3.
ArtsteinRonPoesioMassimo. 2008. Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Computational Linguistics34.4:555–596.
BertrandRoxaneBlachePhilippeEspesserRobertFerréGaëlleMeunierChristinePriego-ValverdeBéatriceRauzyStéphane. 2008. Le CID—corpus of interactional data—annotation et exploitation multimodale de parole conversationnelle. Traitement Automatique des Langues49.3:1–30.
6.
BlachePhilippe. 2013. Chunks et activation: un modèle de facilitation du traitement linguistique. Proceedings of TALaRE 2013, 229–242. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/F13-1017.
7.
BlachePhilippeBertrandRoxaneFerréGaëlle. 2009. Creating and exploiting multimodal annotated corpora: the ToMA project. Multimodal Corpora: From Models of Natural Interaction to Systems and Applications, ed. by KippMichaelMartinJean-ClaudePaggioPatriziaHeylenDirk, 38–53. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.
8.
BlachePhilippeRauzyStéphane. 2008. Influence de la qualité de l’étiquetage sur le chunking: une corrélation dépendant de la taille des chunks. Proceedings of TALN 2008, 290–299. Avignon, France.
9.
BlachePhilippeRauzyStéphane. 2012. Robustness and processing difficulty models. A pilot study for eye-tracking data on the French Treebank. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Eye-tracking and Natural Language Processing, 21–36. http://aclweb.org/anthology/W12-4903.
10.
BoersmaPaulWeeninkDavid. 2001. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International5.9–10:341–345.
11.
ButterworthBrian. 1975. Hesitation and semantic planning in speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research4.1:75–87.
12.
CarlettaJean. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: the kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics22.2:249–254.
ChafeWallace L.1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
ChenAlvin Cheng-Hsien. 2012. Prosodic Phrasing in Mandarin Spontaneous Speech: A Computational-acoustic Perspective. Taipei: National Taiwan University dissertation.
16.
ChenKeh-JiannHuangChu-RenChangLi-PingHsuHui-Li. 1996. Sinica Corpus: design methodology for balanced corpora. Proceedings of the Eleventh Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, 167–176. Seoul, Korea.
17.
ClarkHerbert H.WasowThomas. 1998. Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology37.3:201–242.
18.
CohenJacob. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement20.1:37–46.
19.
DankovičováJ.1997. The domain of articulation rate variation in Czech. Journal of Phonetics25.3:287–312.
20.
DegandLiesbethCatherine SimonAnne. 2005. Minimal Discourse Units: Can we define them, and why should we?Proceedings of SEM-05. Connectors, Discourse Framing and Discourse Structure: From Corpus-based and Experimental Analyses to Discourse Theories, 65–74.
21.
DegandLiesbethCatherine SimonAnne. 2009. On identifying basic discourse units in speech: theoretical and empirical issues. Discours: Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique 4. http://discours.revues.org/5852.
22.
EdlundJensHeldnerMattiasGustafsonJoakim. 2005. Utterance segmentation and turn-taking in spoken dialogue systems. Sprachtechnologie, mobile Kommunikation und linguistische Ressourcen, ed. by FisseniBernhardSchmitzHans-ChristianSchröderBernhardWagnerPetra, 576–587. Frankfurt am Main & New York: Lang.
23.
FernandezRaquelGinzburgJonathanGregoryHowardLappinShalom. 2007. Shards: fragment resolution in dialogue. Computing Meaning, Vol. 3, ed. by BuntHarry C.MuskensReinhard, 125–144. Dordrecht: Springer.
24.
FordCecilia E.ThompsonSandra A.. 1996. Interactional units in conversation: syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. Interaction and Grammar, ed. by OchsElinorSchegloffEmanuel A.ThompsonSandra A., 134–184. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
FordMarilynHolmesVirginia M.. 1978. Planning units and syntax in sentence production. Cognition6.1:35–53.
26.
FournierChrisInkpenDiana. 2012. Segmentation similarity and agreement. Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 152–161. Montréal, Canada.
27.
FrederiksenCarl H.1977. Semantic processing units in understanding text. Discourse Production and Comprehension, ed. by FreedleRoy O., 57–87. Norwood: Ablex.
28.
GeeJames PaulGrosjeanFrançois. 1983. Performance structures: a psycholinguistic and linguistic appraisal. Cognitive Psychology15.4:411–458.
29.
GerdesKimKahaneSylvainLacheretAnneTruongArthurPietrandreaPaola. 2012. Intonosyntactic data structures: the rhapsodie treebank of spoken French. Proceedings of the 6th Linguistic Annotation Workshop, 85–94. Jeju Island, Korea.
30.
GivónTalmy. 1993. English Grammar: A Function-based Introduction, Vol. 2. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
31.
GrossDerekAllenJames F.TraumDavid R.. 1992. The Trains 91 Dialogues. TRAINS Technical Note 92-1. Rochester: Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester.
32.
GroszBarbara J.SidnerCandace L.. 1986. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics12.3:175–204.
33.
HearstMarti A.1994. Multi-paragraph segmentation of expository text. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 9–16. Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA.
34.
HirstDanielBouzonCaroline. 2005. The effect of stress and boundaries on segmental duration in a corpus of authentic speech (British English). Proceedings of INTERSPEECH 2005, 29–32, Lisbon, Portugal.
35.
HirstDanielDi CristoAlbert. 1984. French intonation: a parametric approach. Die Neueren Sprachen83.5:554–569.
36.
HobbsJerry R.1978. Why is discourse coherent? SRI Technical Note 176 (No. SRI-TN-176). Menlo Park: SRI International.
37.
IllinaIrinaFohrDominiqueMellaOdileCerisaraChristophe. 2004. The automatic news transcription system: ANTS, some real time experiments. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing—ICSLP’04, October 4–8, 2004. Jeju Island, Korea.
38.
JunSun-AhFougeronCécile. 2000. A phonological model of French intonation. Intonation: Analysis, Modeling and Technology, ed. by BotinisAntonis, 209–242. Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer.
39.
LacheretAnneObinNicolasAvanziMathieu. 2010. Design and evaluation of shared prosodic annotation for spontaneous French speech: from expert knowledge to non-expert annotation. Proceedings of the Fourth Linguistic Annotation Workshop, ACL 2010, 265–273. Uppsala, Sweden.
40.
LiuYi-FenTsengShu-Chuan. 2009. Linguistic patterns detected through a prosodic segmentation in spontaneous Taiwan Mandarin speech. Linguistic Patterns in Spontaneous Speech, ed. by TsengShu-Chuan, 147–166. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
41.
LiuYi-FenTsengShu-ChuanRoger JangJ.-S.. 2014. Phone boundary annotation in conversational speech. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2014), 848–853. Reykjavik, Iceland.
42.
MichelasAmandineD’ImperioMariapaola. 2010. Accentual phrase boundaries and lexical access in French. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2010. Chicago, Illinois, USA.
43.
MullerPhilippeVergez-CouretMariannePrévotLaurentAsherNicholasFarahBenamaraBrasMyriamLe DraoulecAnneVieuLaure. 2012. Manuel d’annotation en relations de discours du projet annodis. Technical Report 21, CLLE-ERSS, Toulouse University.
44.
MyersAntje S.1997. Conceptual influences on grammatical planning units. Language and Cognitive Processes12.5–6:859–863.
PassonneauRebecca J.LitmanDiane J.. 1997. Discourse segmentation by human and automated means. Computational Linguistics23.1:103–139.
47.
PeshkovKlimPrévotLaurent. 2014. Segmentation evaluation metrics, a comparison grounded on prosodic and discourse units. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2014), 321–325. Reykjavik, Iceland.
48.
PeshkovKlimPrévotLaurentBertrandRoxaneRauzyStéphaneBlachePhilippe. 2012. Quantitative experiments on prosodic and discourse units in the corpus of interactional data. Proceedings of SemDial 2012: The 16th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, 19–21.
49.
PevznerLevHearstMarti A.. 2002. A critique and improvement of an evaluation metric for text segmentation. Computational Linguistics28.1:19–36.
50.
PierrehumbertJanetHirschbergJulia. 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. Intentions in Communication, ed. by CohenPhilip R.MorganJerry L.PollackMartha E., 271–311. Cambridge: MIT Press.
51.
PolanyiLiviaCulyChrisvan den BergMartinLorenzo ThioneGianAhnDavid. 2004. A rule based approach to discourse parsing. Proceedings of the 5th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue at HLT-NAACL 2004, 108–117.
52.
PolanyiLiviaSchaRemko. 1984. A syntactic approach to discourse semantics. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 413–419.
53.
PortesCristelBertrandRoxane. 2011. Permanence et variation des unités prosodiques dans le discours et l’interaction. Journal of French Language Studies21.1:97–110.
54.
PostBrechtje. 2000. Tonal and Phrasal Structures in French Intonation. The Hague: Thesus.
55.
PrévotLaurent. 2014. Manuel de segmentation de parole conversationnelle en unités discursives. Technical report. LPL, Aix Marseille Université.
56.
SacksHarveySchegloffEmanuel A.JeffersonGail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50.4:696–735.
57.
SelkirkElisabeth O.1986. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
58.
SeltingMargret. 1996. On the interplay of syntax and prosody in the constitution of turn-constructional units and turns in conversation. Pragmatics6.3:371–388.
59.
SeltingMargret. 2000. The construction of units in conversational talk. Language in Society29.4:477–517.
60.
ShribergElizabeth Ellen. 1994. Preliminaries to a Theory of Speech Disfluencies. Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley dissertation.
61.
SimonAnne-CatherineDegandLiesbeth. 2011. L’analyse en unités discursives de base: pourquoi et comment?Langue Française170:45–59.
62.
StedeManfred. 2012. Discourse Processing. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
63.
TaoHongyin. 1996. Units in Mandarin Conversation: Prosody, Discourse, and Grammar.Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
64.
TraumDavid R.HeemanPeter A.. 1997. Utterance units in spoken dialogue. Dialogue Processing in Spoken Language Systems, 125–140. Berlin & New York: Springer.
65.
TsengShu-Chuan. 1999. Grammar, Prosody and Speech Disfluencies in Spoken Dialogues. Bielefeld: University of Bielefeld dissertation.
66.
TsengShu-Chuan. 2013. Lexical coverage in Taiwan Mandarin conversation. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing8.1:1–18.
67.
VendlerZeno. 1957. Verbs and times. Philosophical Review66.2:143–160.
68.
XueNianwen. 2008. Labeling Chinese predicates with semantic roles. Computational Linguistics34.2:225–255.
