Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 976

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Measuring spoken language: a unit for all reasons

Foster, P·2000·Applied Linguistics
DOI 10.1093/applin/21.3.354
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The analysis of spoken language requires a principled way of dividing transcribed data into units in order to assess features such as accuracy and complexity. If such analyses are to be comparable across different studies, there must be agreement on the nature of the unit, and it must be possible to apply this unit reliably to a range of different types of speech data. There are a number of different units in use, the various merits of which have been discussed by Crookes (1990). However, while these have been used to facilitate the analysis of spoken language data, there is presently no comprehensive, accessible definition of any of them, nor are detailed guides available on how to identify such units in data sets. Research reports tend to provide simplistic two-line definitions of units exemplified, if at all, by unproblematic written examples. These are inadequate when applied to transcriptions of complex oral data, which tend not to lend themselves easily to a clear division into units. This paper was motivated by the need each of the three authors felt for a reliable and comprehensively defined unit to assist with the analysis of a variety of recordings of native and non-native speakers of English. We first discuss in very general terms the criteria according to which such a unit might be selected. Next, we examine the main categories of unit which have been adopted previously and provide a justification for the particular type of unit that we have chosen. Focusing on this unit, we identify a number of problems which are associated with the definition and exemplification of units of this type, and give examples of the awkward cases found in actual data. Finally we offer a definition of our unit, the Analysis of Speech Unit (AS-unit), providing adequate detail to address the problematic data analyses we have illustrated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/applin/21.3.354

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Foster, P.
Venue
Applied Linguistics
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2000-09-01
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
354-375
ISSN
  • 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-450X
DOI
10.1093/applin/21.3.354
OpenAlex
W1966573259
Cited by
976
References
0
FWCI
4.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.