It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a burst at the end of a syllable in a word like cat. Variation such as this is often considered to be problematic for speech recogni tion: (1) "In most systems for sentence recognition, such modifications must be viewed as a kind of 'noise' that makes it more difficult to hypothesize lexical candidates given an in put phonetic transcription. To see that this must be the case, we note that each phonological rule [in a certain example] results in irreversible ambiguity-the phonological rule does not have a unique inverse that could be used to recover the underlying phonemic representation for a lexical item. For example, . . . schwa vowels could be the first vowel in a word like 'about' or the surface realization of almost any English vowel appearing in a sufficiently destressed word. The tongue flap [(] could have come from a /t! or a /d/. " [65, pp. 548-549] This view of allophonic variation is representative of much of the speech recognition literature, especially during the late 1970's. One can find similar statements by Cole and Jakimik [22] and by Jelinek [50].
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.
£ 8 shipping within United Kingdom
Destination, rates & speeds£ 9.54 shipping from Germany to United Kingdom
Destination, rates & speedsSeller: BuchWeltWeit Ludwig Meier e.K., Bergisch Gladbach, Germany
Taschenbuch. Condition: Neu. This item is printed on demand - it takes 3-4 days longer - Neuware -It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a burst at the end of a syllable in a word like cat. Variation such as this is often considered to be problematic for speech recogni tion: (1) 'In most systems for sentence recognition, such modifications must be viewed as a kind of 'noise' that makes it more difficult to hypothesize lexical candidates given an in put phonetic transcription. To see that this must be the case, we note that each phonological rule (in a certain example) results in irreversible ambiguity-the phonological rule does not have a unique inverse that could be used to recover the underlying phonemic representation for a lexical item. For example, . . . schwa vowels could be the first vowel in a word like 'about' or the surface realization of almost any English vowel appearing in a sufficiently destressed word. The tongue flap (.) could have come from a /t! or a /d/. ' (65, pp. 548 - 549) This view of allophonic variation is representative of much of the speech recognition literature, especially during the late 1970's. One can find similar statements by Cole and Jakimik (22) and by Jelinek (50). 284 pp. Englisch. Seller Inventory # 9781461292005
Quantity: 2 available
Seller: Ria Christie Collections, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
Condition: New. In. Seller Inventory # ria9781461292005_new
Quantity: Over 20 available
Seller: moluna, Greven, Germany
Condition: New. Dieser Artikel ist ein Print on Demand Artikel und wird nach Ihrer Bestellung fuer Sie gedruckt. It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a bur. Seller Inventory # 4191729
Quantity: Over 20 available
Seller: Best Price, Torrance, CA, U.S.A.
Condition: New. SUPER FAST SHIPPING. Seller Inventory # 9781461292005
Quantity: 2 available
Seller: AHA-BUCH GmbH, Einbeck, Germany
Taschenbuch. Condition: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a burst at the end of a syllable in a word like cat. Variation such as this is often considered to be problematic for speech recogni tion: (1) 'In most systems for sentence recognition, such modifications must be viewed as a kind of 'noise' that makes it more difficult to hypothesize lexical candidates given an in put phonetic transcription. To see that this must be the case, we note that each phonological rule (in a certain example) results in irreversible ambiguity-the phonological rule does not have a unique inverse that could be used to recover the underlying phonemic representation for a lexical item. For example, . . . schwa vowels could be the first vowel in a word like 'about' or the surface realization of almost any English vowel appearing in a sufficiently destressed word. The tongue flap (.) could have come from a /t! or a /d/. ' (65, pp. 548 - 549) This view of allophonic variation is representative of much of the speech recognition literature, especially during the late 1970's. One can find similar statements by Cole and Jakimik (22) and by Jelinek (50). Seller Inventory # 9781461292005
Quantity: 1 available
Seller: THE SAINT BOOKSTORE, Southport, United Kingdom
Paperback / softback. Condition: New. This item is printed on demand. New copy - Usually dispatched within 5-9 working days 544. Seller Inventory # C9781461292005
Quantity: Over 20 available
Seller: buchversandmimpf2000, Emtmannsberg, BAYE, Germany
Taschenbuch. Condition: Neu. This item is printed on demand - Print on Demand Titel. Neuware -It is well-known that phonemes have different acoustic realizations depending on the context. Thus, for example, the phoneme /t! is typically realized with a heavily aspirated strong burst at the beginning of a syllable as in the word Tom, but without a burst at the end of a syllable in a word like cat. Variation such as this is often considered to be problematic for speech recogni tion: (1) 'In most systems for sentence recognition, such modifications must be viewed as a kind of 'noise' that makes it more difficult to hypothesize lexical candidates given an in put phonetic transcription. To see that this must be the case, we note that each phonological rule [in a certain example] results in irreversible ambiguity-the phonological rule does not have a unique inverse that could be used to recover the underlying phonemic representation for a lexical item. For example, . . . schwa vowels could be the first vowel in a word like 'about' or the surface realization of almost any English vowel appearing in a sufficiently destressed word. The tongue flap [(] could have come from a /t! or a /d/. ' [65, pp. 548-549] This view of allophonic variation is representative of much of the speech recognition literature, especially during the late 1970's. One can find similar statements by Cole and Jakimik [22] and by Jelinek [50].Springer Verlag GmbH, Tiergartenstr. 17, 69121 Heidelberg 284 pp. Englisch. Seller Inventory # 9781461292005
Quantity: 1 available
Seller: Books Puddle, New York, NY, U.S.A.
Condition: New. pp. 286. Seller Inventory # 2697793176
Quantity: 4 available
Seller: Majestic Books, Hounslow, United Kingdom
Condition: New. Print on Demand pp. 286 66:B&W 7 x 10 in or 254 x 178 mm Perfect Bound on White w/Gloss Lam. Seller Inventory # 94604103
Quantity: 4 available
Seller: Lucky's Textbooks, Dallas, TX, U.S.A.
Condition: New. Seller Inventory # ABLIING23Mar2716030030376
Quantity: Over 20 available