You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Should UW be included in the phoneme set?
It seems g2p.phonemes operates under the general rule of of excluding the 'parent' category when its variants exist. For example, AA is not included since its variants AA0, AA1, AA2 are in the set. Same for AE, AH, AW, AY, etc. But UW seems to be the only exception. Furthermore, when I do simple frequency analyses on sizable corpora (not super rigorously though), UW never occurs while its variants do. I wonder if the phoneme set can safely forgo UW.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Should UW be included in the phoneme set?
It seems g2p.phonemes operates under the general rule of of excluding the 'parent' category when its variants exist. For example, AA is not included since its variants AA0, AA1, AA2 are in the set. Same for AE, AH, AW, AY, etc. But UW seems to be the only exception. Furthermore, when I do simple frequency analyses on sizable corpora (not super rigorously though), UW never occurs while its variants do. I wonder if the phoneme set can safely forgo UW.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: