Palavras-chave
Qualidade de voz
Tipicidade
Como Citar
Dados de financiamento
-
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Números do Financiamento 88887.804443/2023-00 -
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
Números do Financiamento 312885/2022-9
Resumo
Exames fonético-forenses pautados no arcabouço bayesiano avaliam a força probatória da evidência pela razão entre o grau de similaridade e o grau de tipicidade das amostras de fala comparadas. A tipicidade diz sobre o grau de raridade de um evento linguístico e para calculá-la é preciso ter acesso a dados de fala que sejam representativos da população relevante da qual se supõe que o criminoso e os suspeitos pertençam. Concomitante à promoção de esforços para a elaboração e/ou seleção desses bancos de dados, é preciso também discutir aspectos metodológicos que permitam a representação e seleção das características sociais e linguísticas em análise. Este trabalho tem o objetivo de apresentar e discutir critérios sociolinguísticos, fonéticos e associados à voz para a composição de bancos de fala e/ou para a constituição de amostras extraídas de bancos de fala para a análise de tipicidade em correlatos acústicos e auditivos da qualidade de voz. O enfoque neste elemento prosódico justifica-se pela sua natureza indexical, pela sua relevância prática no cenário fonético-forense e pelo caráter de especificidade desejável à elaboração de populações relevantes.
Referências
ABERCOMBRIE, D. Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1967.
BARBOSA, P. A. Conhecendo melhor a prosódia: aspectos teóricos e metodológicos daquilo que molda nossa enunciação. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem (UFMG), v. 20, n. 1, 2012, p. 11-27.
BARBOSA, P. A. et al. Análise Fonético-Forense: em tarefa de Comparação de Locutor. Campinas: Millenium Editora, 2020.
BARBOSA, P. A. Manual de prosódia experimental [livro eletrônico], Coleção Linguística em Ação. 1 ed. Campinas, SP: Editora da Abralin, 2022.
BARBOSA, P. A.; MADUREIRA, S. Manual de fonética acústica experimental: aplicações a dados do português. [S. l.]: Cortez editora, 2015.
BORREGO, M. C.; MADUREIRA, S.; CAMARGO, Z. Expressividade na voz profissional falada. In: LOPES, L. et al. (org.). Fundamentos e atualidades em Voz Profissional. 1. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Thieme Revinter, 2021. v. 1, p. 1-10.
BECK, J. M.; SCHAEFFLER, F. Voice quality variation in Scottish adolescents: gender versus geography. Proceedings of the 18th ICPhS, Glasgow, 2015.
BECK, J. Perceptual analysis of voice quality: the place of vocal profile analysis. In: HARDCASTLE, W.J.; BECK, J. (Eds.). A Figure of Speech: A Festschrift for John Laver (1st ed.), Routledge, 2005, p. 285-322.
BECK, J. Vocal Profile Analysis Scheme: A User's Manual. Queen Margaret University College-QMUC, Speech Science Research Centre, Edinburgh, 2007.
BELL, A. Language style as audience design. Language in society, 13, 1984, p. 145-204.
BYRD, D. Relations of sex and dialect to reduction. Speech Communication, n. 15, 1994, p. 39-54.
CHAMBERS, J. K. Dialect acquisition. Language, n. 68, 1992, p. 673-705.
CHAMPOD, C.; MEUWLY, D. The inference of identity in forensic speaker recognition. Speech Communication, v. 31, n. 2-3, 2000, p. 193-203.
CLYNE, M.; EISIKOVITS, E; TOLLFREE, L. F. Ethnic varieties of Australian English. In: BLAIR, D; COLLINS, P. (Eds.). English in Australia. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001, p. 223-38.
COLEMAN, R. F. WALLS, H. J. The evaluation of scientific evidence. Criminal Law Review, 1974, p. 276-287.
DELIYSKI, D. D.; SHAW, H. S.; EVANS, M. K. Adverse Effects of Environmental Noise on Acoustic Voice Quality Measurements. Journal of Voice, [s. l.], v. 19, n. 1, p. 15-28, 2005.
DI PAOLO, M.; FABER, A. Phonation differences and the phonetic content of the tense-lax contrast in Utah English. Language Variation and Change, n. 2, 1990, p. 155-204.
DI PAOLO, M.; YAEGER-DROR, M. Sociophonetics: a student’s guide. New York: Routledge, 2011.
ECKERT, P. Age as a sociolinguistic variable. In: COULMAS, F. (Ed.). Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997, p.151-67.
ERIKSSON, A. Aural/acoustic vs. automatic methods in forensic phonetic case work. Forensic speaker recognition: Law enforcement and counter-terrorism, p. 41-69, 2012.
ESLING, J. H. Crosslinguistic aspects of voice quality. In: KENT, R. D.; BALL, M. J. (Eds.). Voice quality measurement. San Diego: Thomson Learning Singular, 2000. p. 25-35.
ESLING, J. H. The identification of features of voice quality in social groups. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, n. 7, 1978, p. 18-23.
FOULKES, P.; SCOBBIE, J.M.; WATT, D. Sociophonetics. In: HARDCASTLE, W.; LAVER, J.; GIBBON, F. (Eds.). Handbook of Phonetic Science. 2. ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2010.
GOLD, E.; FRENCH, P. International practices in forensic speaker comparison. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, v. 18, n. 2, 2011, p. 293-307.
GOLD, E.; FRENCH, P. International practices in forensic speaker comparisons: second survey. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, v. 26, n. 1, 2019, p. 1-20.
HENTON, C.G.; BLADON, A.W. Breathiness in a normal female speaker: inefficiency versus desirability. Language and Communication, n. 5, p. 221-27, 1985.
HUGHES, V. S. The definition of the relevant population and the collection of data for likelihood ratio-based forensic voice comparison. PhD Thesis—York, UK: University of York, 2014.
HUGHES, V.; FOULKES, P. What is the relevant population? Considerations for the computation of likelihood ratios in forensic voice comparison. In: 2017, York. Proceedings of Interspeech 2017. York: [s. n.], 2017.
ISHIHARA, S.; KINOSHITA, Y. How many do we need? Exploration of the Population Size Effect on the performance of forensic speaker classification. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech). Brisbane, Australia, 2008, p. 1941-1944.
JACEWICZ, E.; FOX, R. A.; SALMONS, J. Vowel space areas across dialects and gender. Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetics Sciences, Saarbrücken, 2007, p.1465-8.
JOHNSON, K. Acoustic and auditory phonetics. USA: Blackwell publishing. 2ª ed., 2003.
KENDALL, T.; FRIDLAND, V. Sociophonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
KINOSHITA, Y; ISHIHARA, S. Background population: how does it affect LR based forensic voice comparison? The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, v. 21, n. 2, 2014, p. 191-224.
LABOV, W. Principles of linguistic change: external factors. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001.
LABOV, W. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1972.
LABOV, W. The social motivation of a sound change. Word, n. 19, p. 273-309, 1963.
LABOV, W.; COHEN, P.; ROBINS, C.; LEWIS, J. A study of the non-standard English of negro and Puerto Rican speakers in New York City. New York: Columbia University Press, 1968.
LAVER, J. Voice Quality and Indexical Information. In: British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 3:1, 1968, p. 43-54.
LAVER, J. The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1980.
LAVER, J. The semiotic nature of phonetic data. York Papers in Linguistics, v. 6, 1976, p. 55-62.
LAVER, J., BECK, J. Vocal Profile Analysis Scheme–VPAS [handout]. Edinburgh: Queen Margareth University College, Research Centre, 2007.
LOCAL, J. Phonetic detail and the organization of talk-in-interaction. Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetics Sciences, Saarbrücken, 2007, p.1-10.
LOCAL, J. Variable domains and variable relevance: interpreting phonetics exponents. Journal of Phonetics, n. 31, 2003, p. 321-39.
MADUREIRA, S.; CAMARGO, Z. O protocolo de análise perceptiva VPA e seus usos para a área forense. In: BARBOSA, P. A. et al. (org.). Análise Fonético-Forense: em tarefa de Comparação de Locutor. Campinas: Millennium, 2020. p. 89-106.
MADUREIRA, S.; FONTES, M. A. S. Multimodal impressions of voice quality settings: the role of vocal and visual symbolism. Frontiers in Communication, v. 8, p. 1114447, 2023.
MENDOZA-DENTON, N.; JANNEDY, S. Low pitch in the linguistic performance of California Latina gang girls. In: Perceiving and Performing Gender, Fourth Symposium on Gender Research at Kiel University, Alemanha. 1998.
MEYERHOFF, M. Introduction Sociolinguistics. 3. ed. London: Routledge, 2018.
MORRISON, G. S. Forensic voice comparison and the paradigm shift. Science and Justice, v. 49, n. 4, 2009, p. 298-308.
MORRISON, G. S. Forensic voice comparison. In Expert Evidence (Ch. 99). (Ed.) I. Freckelton and H. Selby. Sydney: Thomson Reuters, 2010.
MORRISON, G. S.; ROSE, P.; ZHANG, C. Protocol for the collection of databases of recordings for forensic-voice-comparison research and practice. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, [s. l.], v. 44, n. 2, p. 155-167, 2012.
MORISSON, A. L. da C.; MACHADO, C. E. P.; REIS, P. M. G. I. Exames de registros de Áudio e Imagens. In: TOCCHETTO, D.; ESPINDULA, A. (org.). Criminalística: procedimentos e metodologias. 4. ed. [S. l.]: Millennium Editora, 2019
NOLAN, F. et al. The DyViS database: style-controlled recordings of 100 homogeneous speakers for forensic phonetic research. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, [s. l.], v. 16, n. 1, p. 31-57, 2009.
OGDEN, R. Non-modal voice quality and turn-taking in Finnish. In: COUPER-KUHLEN, E.; FORD, C. (eds.). Sound patterns in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. p. 29-62.
PITTAM, J. Voice in the social interaction: An interdisciplinary approach. Londres, Sage Publications, 1994.
ROSE, P. Forensic Speaker Identification. London: Taylor and Francis, 2002.
ROSE, P. Technical Forensic Speaker Identification from a Bayesian Linguist’s Perspective. In Keynote paper, Forensic Speaker Recognition Workshop, Speaker Odyssey’ 04. Toledo, Spain, 2004, p. 3-10.
SAN SEGUNDO, E. International survey on voice quality: Forensic practitioners versus voice therapists. Estudios de fonética experimental, 2021, p. 9-34.
SANKOFF, D.; LABERGE, S. The linguistic market and the statistical explanation of variability. In: SANKOFF, D. (Ed.). Linguistic variation: models and methods. New York: Academic Press, 1978. p. 239-50.
SCHERER, K. SCHERER, K. R. What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 2005, p. 695-729.
SCHILLING-ESTES, N. Investigating ‘self-conscious’ speech: the performance register in Ocracoke English. Language in Society, n. 27, p. 53-83, 1998.
SIEGEL, J. Second dialect acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Speech, Language and the Law 20 (2), 2013, p. 277-324.
SILVA, G. A. Proposta de Construção de um Banco de Dados de Amostras de Fala para Uso Forense em um Arcabouço Bayesiano. Revista Brasileira de Criminalística, [s. l.], v. 5, n. 1, p. 35-45, 2016.
STUART-SMITH, J. Glasgow: accent and voice quality. In: Foulkes, P.; DOCHERTY, G. J. (Eds). Urban Voices: Accent Studies in the British Isles. London: Arnald, 1999. p. 203-222.
THOMAS, E. Sociophonetics: an introduction. Basingstroke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillian, 2011.
TRENT, S. Voice quality: listener identification of african-american versus caucasian speakers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, n.98, 1995, p. 29-3
VALENTE, C. R. Perspectivas da fonética forense num cenário de quebra do dogma da unicidade. In: Anais da Conferência Internacional de Ciências Forenses em Multimídia e Segurança Eletrônica–ICMedia, 2012, p. 7-27.
VOGEL, A. P; MORGAN, A. T. Factors affecting the quality of sound recording for speech and voice analysis. International journal of speech-language pathology, v. 11, n. 6, 2009, p. 431-437.
WAGNER, S. E. Age grading in Sociolinguistic Theory. Language and Linguistics Compass, v.6, n. 6, p. 371-82, 2012.
WANG, B. X.; HUGHES, V.; FOULKES, P. The effect of sampling variability on systems and individual speakers in likelihood ratio-based forensic voice comparison. Speech Communication, [s. l.], v. 138, p. 38-49, 2022.
WATT, D. et al. Assessing the effects of accent-mismatched reference population databases on the performance of an automatic speaker recognition system. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, [s. l.], v. 27, n. 1, p. 1-34, 2020.
WOLFRAM, W. A linguistic description of Detroit negro speech. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1969.
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos