Classification of Arabic fricative consonants according to their places of articulation

Elfahm, Youssef; Abajaddi, Nesrine; Mounir, Badia; Elmaazouzi, Laila; Mounir, Ilham; Farchi, Abdelmajid

doi:10.11591/ijece.v12i1.pp936-945

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This comparison shows that the cepstral coefficients were more trustworthy predictors in the categorization of the nine Azerbaijani fricatives. Based on the energy in the bands as an acoustic indication, Elfahm et al [24] developed a technique for categorizing Arabic fricative consonants into two main groups: sibilant and non-sibilant. They discovered that sibilant consonants had zero energy in the band (800 to 2,000 Hz), while non-sibilant had the lowest energy in the region (5,000 Hz to 8,000 Hz).…”

Section: Figure 1 Diagram Classifying the Arabic Fricative Consonantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of Arabic sibilant consonants

Elfahm¹,

Abajaddi²,

Mounir

et al. 2023

IJECE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to develop an automatic speech recognition system in order to classify sibilant Arabic consonants into two groups: alveolar consonants and post-alveolar consonants. The proposed method is based on the use of the energy distribution, in a consonant-vowel type syllable, as an acoustic cue. The application of this method on our own corpus reveals that the amount of energy included in a vocal signal is a very important parameter in the characterization of Arabic sibilant consonants. For consonants classifications, the accuracy achieved to identify consonants as alveolar or post-alveolar is 100%. For post-alveolar consonants, the rate is 96% and for alveolar consonants, the rate is over 94%. Our classification technique outperformed existing algorithms based on support vector machines and neural networks in terms of classification rate.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 Diagram Classifying the Arabic Fricative Consonantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of Arabic sibilant consonants

Elfahm¹,

Abajaddi²,

Mounir

et al. 2023

IJECE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The primary source of errors was determined to be students lack of comprehension on proper pronunciation. Elfahm et al (2022) additionally looks at comparable fricatives in Arabic consonants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Analysis of Pronouncing Post-Alveolar Fricative Faced by the English Education Students of Tanjungpura University

Pratama,

Sada,

Ikhsanudin

2024

jees

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this research is to describe the percentage of post-alveolar fricative sound pronunciation acceptability among the English Language Education students in their sixth semester at the University of Tanjungpura. The scope of the study would be limited to the comparison of the first and second formants of the participants with those of the native speaker, whose formants were evaluated utilising the PRAAT software. The data was gathered from a pronunciation performance test that was conducted via an audio recording procedure. The study involved a total of 15 participants who were categorised into three distinct ethnic groups, including Indonesian Tionghoa, Dayak, and Malay. Each participant pronouncing a set of 20 words, consisting of both voiceless and voiced post-alveolar fricatives. According to the findings of the study, 1) the percentage of voiceless post-alveolar fricative sounds that were considered ‘Acceptable’ was 40.5%, whereas the percentage of those that were considered ‘Not Acceptable’ was 59.5%., 2) the percentage of ‘Acceptable’ pronunciation of voiced post-alveolar fricative sounds was 42%, while the percentage of those that were ‘Not Acceptable’ was 58%. The inference that can be drawn is that students encounter challenges when attempting to articulate post-alveolar fricative sounds.

show abstract