Modelling autosegmental phonology with multi-tape finite state transducers

Phonology may be briefly defined as the study of sound patterns in spoken language. One of the most well-known computational models of phonology, Koskenniemi's two-level phonology, is based on an underlying linguistic theory that has been superseded by autosegmental phonology, which began with the work of Goldsmith. There is a need for computational models that are faithful to this more recent theory. Such a model can form the basis of a computational tool that can quickly and accurately check the validity of a phonological analysis on a large amount of phonetic data, freeing the linguist from the tedious and enor-prone task of doing this by hand. This-thesis presents a new computational model of phonology that is faithful to standard autosegmental theory, that has clearly adequate expressive power, and that is suitable as the basis for a tool for phonological analysis. It follows on very recent efforts by Kornai and Bird & Ellison to model autosegmental phonology. The model is based on a view of phonology that sees phonological representations as data and phonological rules as procedures that manipulate them. It models rules using multi-tape state-labelled finite transducers (MSFTs), a natural extension of finite state transducers obtained by adding multiple input and output tapes. MSFTs are shown to be powerful enough to express a wide range of autosegmental rules. We also investigate the class of formal languages accepted by multi-tape state-labelled finite automata (MSFAs) when their input tapes are considered to encode a single word in parallel. This class is quite large, including some languages that are not context free. Given that our model is faithful to autosegmental theory, this gives an upper bound on the computational power required to model autosegmental phonological rules.

[1]  Alfred V. Aho Indexed Grammars-An Extension of Context Free Grammars , 1967, SWAT.

[2]  Ewan Klein,et al.  Phonological events , 1990, Journal of Linguistics.

[3]  J. Goldsmith Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology , 1990 .

[4]  Arnold L. Rosenberg,et al.  On n-tape finite state acceptors , 1964, SWCT.

[5]  Steven Bird,et al.  Presenting autosegmental phonology , 1991 .

[6]  Martin Kay,et al.  Nonconcatenative Finite-State Morphology , 1987, EACL.

[7]  Dafydd Gibbon,et al.  Finite State Processing of Tone Systems , 1987, EACL.

[8]  Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery , 1961, Nature.

[9]  C. Douglas Johnson,et al.  Formal Aspects of Phonological Description , 1972 .

[10]  Dana S. Scott,et al.  Finite Automata and Their Decision Problems , 1959, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[11]  John Coleman,et al.  The “no crossing constraint” in autosegmental phonology , 1991 .

[12]  Kimmo Koskenniemi,et al.  A General Computational Model for Word-Form Recognition and Production , 1984 .

[13]  Steven Bird,et al.  Finite-State Phonology in HPSG , 1992, COLING.

[14]  Steven Bird,et al.  One-Level Phonology: Autosegmental Representations and Rules as Finite Automata , 1994, Comput. Linguistics.

[15]  Efim B. Kinber The Inclusion Problem for some Classes of Deterministic Multitape Automata , 1983, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[16]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[17]  Jacques Durand,et al.  Generative and non-linear phonology , 1989 .

[18]  Richard Sproat,et al.  Review of PC-KIMMO: a two-level processor for morphological analysis by Evan L. Antworth. Summer Institute of Linguistics 1990 , 1991 .

[19]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation , 1979 .

[20]  Francis X. Katamba,et al.  Modern Irish: Introduction to Phonology , 2008 .

[21]  David Maier Review of "Introduction to automata theory, languages and computation" by John E. Hopcroft and Jeffrey D. Ullman. Addison-Wesley 1979. , 1980, SIGA.

[22]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  Indexed Grammars—An Extension of Context-Free Grammars , 1967, SWAT.

[23]  Patrick C. Fischer,et al.  Multi-tape and infinite-state automata—a survey , 1965, Commun. ACM.

[24]  Graeme D. Ritchie On The Generative Power Of Two-Level Morphological Rules , 1989, EACL.

[25]  Kenneth Ward Church A Finite-State Parser for Use in Speech Recognition , 1983, ACL.

[26]  Peter J. Denning,et al.  Machines, Languages, And Computation , 1978 .

[27]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  Nested Stack Automata , 1969, Journal of the ACM.

[28]  Malcolm Bird,et al.  The Equivalence Problem for Deterministic Two-Tape Automata , 1973, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[29]  Jorge E. Mezei,et al.  On Relations Defined by Generalized Finite Automata , 1965, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[30]  Graeme D. Ritchie Languages Generated by Two-Level Morphological Rules , 1992, Comput. Linguistics.