Subject: Re: Statistics for word rate in natural speech From: Kevin Austin <kevin.austin@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:42:36 -0400 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>To my hearing, this is not ‘speech’. It is a studio assemblage of bits and pieces of spoken [and processed] text. If speech is considered in terms of articulatory phonetics, rather than IPA symbols, I have found the concept of ‘natural speech’ to be more easily explained. Speech is not only the articulation of separate phonemes — the problem with Bicycle Built for Two, but contains pacing and pitch intonation information that carries semantic and emotional content. If ‘natural speech’ is ‘about’ communication of information through sound, there may need to be emotional signifiers within it. I think of the ‘speaking toys’ of years ago, and the current developments in voice synthesis. A bit like the first ‘text readers’ on the old Apple computers — often referred to as a ‘computer voice’. But not computer speech. Kevin > On 2016, Jun 22, at 12:23 PM, Jont Allen <jontalle@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > You’re right. This Big Boi speech is hitting the perceptual limit. > Just how well articulated is this "speech"? Is like rap speech I have hear, that you cant understand it unless you already know what it is. >