1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Linguistics
  4. Volume 9, 2023
  5. Article

Annual Review of Linguistics

Volume 9, 2023

Recent Advances in Technologies for Resource Creation and Mobilization in Language Documentation

Abstract

Language documentation as a subfield of linguistics has arisen over the past roughly two and a half decades more or less simultaneously with the widespread availability of inexpensive hardware and software for creating, storing, and sharing digital objects. Thus, in some ways the history of advancements within the discipline is also a history of how technological tools have been developed, tested, adopted, and eventually abandoned as newer technologies appear. In this article we examine some recent technologies used both for creating documentary resources, usually considered to include recorded language events in a variety of genres and settings and enough annotation to make them decipherable, and for then mobilizing those resources so that they can be used and shared in language learning, reclamation, revitalization, and analysis.

Keyword(s): language documentation, recent advances, resource creation, resource mobilization, technology
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504
2023-01-17
2024-05-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/linguistics/9/1/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adams O, Cohn T, Neubig G, Cruz H, Bird S, Michaud A. 2018. Evaluating phonemic transcription of low-resource tonal languages for language documentation. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation3356–65 Paris: Eur. Lang. Resour. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Adams O, Galliot B, Wisniewski G, Lambourne N, Foley B et al. 2021. User-friendly automatic transcription of low-resource languages: plugging ESPnet into Elpis. arXiv:2101.03027v2 [cs.CL]
  3. Anastasopoulos A, Cattelan A, Dou Z-Y, Federico M, Federman C et al. 2020. TICO-19: the Translation Initiative for COvid-19. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on NLP for COVID-19 (Part 2) at EMNLP 20201–25 Stroudsburg, PA: Assoc. Comput. Linguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Anastasopoulos A, Chiang D. 2017. A case study on using speech-to-translation alignments for language documentation. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on the Use of Computational Methods in the Study of Endangered Languages170–78 Honolulu: Assoc. Comput. Linguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson J, Christen K, Hudson M, Francis J Sr. 2008. TK labels. Local Contexts https://localcontexts.org/labels/traditional-knowledge-labels/
  6. Andreassen HN. 2022. Archiving research data. See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 89–100
  7. ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language. 2021a. Data loader. https://language-archives.services/about/data-loader/
  8. ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language. 2021b. Raspberry Pi as a repatriation device. https://language-archives.services/about/pi/
  9. Babinski S, Bowern C. 2021. Contemporary digital linguistics and the archive: an urgent review Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 4–7
  10. Beier C, Michael L. 2022. Managing lexicography data: a practical, principled approach using FLEx (Fieldworks Language Explorer). See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 301–14
  11. Bender EM. 2019. English isn't generic for language, despite what NLP papers might lead you to believe Paper presented at the Symposium on Data Science & Statistics Bellevue, WA: May 30. http://faculty.washington.edu/ebender/papers/Bender-SDSS-2019.pdf
  12. Bennett R, Henderson R, Harvey M 2022. Tonal variability and marginal contrast: lexical pitch accent in Uspanteko. Prosody and Prosodic Interfaces H Kobuzono, J Ito, A Mester 589–645 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Berez A, Cox C. 2009. CuPED - Software demonstration Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 12–14
  14. Berez AL. 2007. Review of EUDICO Linguistic Annotator (ELAN). Lang. Doc. Conserv. 1:2283–89
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Berez-Kroeker AL, Gawne L, Kung SS, Kelly BF, Heston T et al. 2018. Reproducible research in linguistics: a position statement on data citation and attribution in our field. Linguistics 56:11–18
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Berez-Kroeker AL, McDonnell B, Koller E, Collister LB. 2022. The Open Handbook of Linguistic Data Management Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  17. Bird S, Simons G. 2003. Seven dimensions of portability for language documentation and description. Language 79:3557–82
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Boerger BH. 2011. To BOLDly go where no one has gone before. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 5:208–33
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Boersma P, Weenink D. 2022. Praat: doing phonetics by computer [computer program]. Version 6.2.09. http://www.praat.org/
  20. Bowern C. 2010. Fieldwork and the IRB: a snapshot. Language 86:4897–905
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Bowern C. 2015. Linguistic Fieldwork: A Practical Guide London: Palgrave Macmillan. , 2nd ed..
  22. Boyton J, Moran S, Aristar A, Aristar-Dry H 2006. E-MELD and the School of Best Practices: an ongoing community effort. Sustainable Data from Digital Fieldwork L Barwick, N Thieberger 87–97 Sydney: Univ. Sydney Press
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Brinklow NT, Littell P, Lothian D, Pine A, Souter H. 2019. Indigenous language technologies and language reclamation in Canada. Language Technology for All (LT4All): Enabling Language Diversity and Multilingualism Worldwide European Language Resources Association 402–6 Paris: UNESCO
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Burrell A, Hendery R, Thieberger N. 2019. Glossopticon: visualising archival data. Proceedings of the 2019 23rd International Conference in Information Visualization - Part II IV-2 2019100–3 New York: IEEE
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Caballero G, Carroll L, Mach K. 2019. Accessing, managing, and mobilizing an ELAN-based language documentation corpus: the Kwaras and Namuti tools. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 13:63–82
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Christen K. 2019.. “ The songline is alive in Mukurtu”: return, reuse, and respect. Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication 18, Archival Returns: Central Australia and Beyond L Barwick, J Green, P Vaarzon-Morel 153–72 Honolulu: Univ. Hawaiʻi Press
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Coto-Solano R, Nicholas SA, Hoback B, Cano GT. 2022. Managing data workflows for untrained forced alignment: examples from Costa Rica, Mexico, the Cook Islands, and Vanuatu. See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 423–36
  28. Coto-Solano R, Solórzano SF. 2017. Comparison of two forced alignment systems for aligning Bribri speech. CLEI Electron. J. 20:113
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Cox C 2011. Corpus linguistics and language documentation: challenges for collaboration. Corpus-Based Studies in Language Use, Language Learning, and Language Documentation J Newman, H Baayen, S Rice 239–64 Leiden: Brill
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Cox C. 2022. Managing data in a language documentation corpus. See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 277–86
  31. Debenport E. 2010. The potential complexity of “universal ownership”: cultural property, textual circulation, and linguistic fieldwork. Lang. Commun. 30:3204–10
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Di Carlo P, McDonnell B, Vahapoglu L, Good J, Seyfeddinipur M, Kordas K. 2022. Public health information for minority linguistic communities. Bull World Health Organ 100:178–80
     [Google Scholar]
  33. DiCanio C, Nam H, Whalen DH, Bunnell HT, Amith JD, García RC. 2013. Using automatic alignment to analyze endangered language data: testing the viability of untrained alignment. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134:32235–46
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Dobrin LM. 2021. The Arapesh “suitcase miracle”: the interpretive value of reproducible research. Lang. Doc. Descr. 21:37–69
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Dobrin LM, Ross D. 2017. The IATH ELAN text-sync tool: a simple system for mobilizing ELAN transcripts on- or off-line. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 11:94–102
     [Google Scholar]
  36. E-Line Media. 2014. Never Alone, Kisima Inŋitchuŋa [game]. 2014. https://elinemedia.com/never-alone/
    [Google Scholar]
  37. First People's Cultural Council. 2020. Check before you tech! Brentwood Bay, Can.: First People's Cultural Council https://fpcc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/FPCC-Check-Before-You-Tech.pdf
  38. Foley B, Arnold J, Coto-Solano R, Durantin G, Ellison TM et al. 2018. Building speech recognition systems for language documentation: the CoEDL Endangered Language Pipeline and Inference System (ELPIS). Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Spoken Language Technologies for Under-Resourced Languages (SLTU 2018)200–4 Grenoble, France: Int. Speech. Commun. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Fromont R, Hay J. 2012. LaBB-CAT: an annotation store. Proceedings of the Australasian Language Technology Association Workshop 2012113–17 Stroudsburg, PA: Assoc. Comput. Linguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Gaby A, Woods L 2020. Toward linguistic justice for Indigenous people: a response to Charity Hudley, Mallinson, and Bucholtz. . Language 96:4e268–80
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Goldman JP. 2011. EasyAlign: an automatic phonetic alignment tool under Praat Paper presented at Interspeech Florence, Italy: Aug. 28–31
  42. González S, Grama J, Travis C. 2018a. Forced-alignment comparison for linguistics. Poster presented at CoEDL Fest Melbourne: Feb. 8. https://cloudstor.aarnet.edu.au/plus/s/gyC6vuX5uvc5soG
  43. González S, Travis CE, Grama J, Barth D, Ananthanarayan S. 2018b. Recursive forced alignment: a test on a minority language Proceedings of the 17th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology pp. 145–48 Canberra, Aust.: Australas. Speech Sci. Technol. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Good J 2018. Ethics in language documentation and revitalization. The Oxford Handbook of Endangered Languages K Rehg, L Campbell 419–42 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Hale K, Krauss M, Watahomigie LJ, Yamamoto AY, Craig C et al. 1992. Endangered languages. Language 68:11–42
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Hatton J, Hatton S. 2019. Bloom: now communities can create their own books. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Feb. 28–Mar. 3. http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/44889
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Hatton J, Holton G, Seyfeddinipur M, Thieberger N. 2021. Lameta [software].. https://sites.google.com/site/metadatatooldiscussion/home
  48. Hendery R, Burrell A. 2020. Playful interfaces to the archive and the embodied experience of data. J. Doc. 76:2484–501
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Henke RE, Berez-Kroeker AL. 2016. A brief history of archiving in language documentation, with an annotated bibliography. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 10:411–57
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Hill JH. 2002.. “ Expert rhetorics” in advocacy for endangered languages: Who is listening, and what do they hear?. J. Linguist. Anthropol. 12:2119–33
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Himmelmann NP. 1998. Documentary and descriptive linguistics. Linguistics 36:161–95
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Himmelmann NP 2006. Language documentation: What is it and what is it good for?. Essentials of Language Documentation J Gippert, NP Himmelmann, U Mosel 1–30 Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Himmelmann NP. 2012. Linguistic data types and the interface between language documentation and description. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 6:187–207
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Himmelmann NP 2018. Meeting the transcription challenge. Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication 15, Reflections on Language Documentation: 20 Years after Himmelmann 1998 B McDonnell, AL Berez-Kroeker, G Holton 33–40 Honolulu: Univ. Hawaiʻi Press
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Holton G, Leonard WY, Pulsifer PL. 2022. Indigenous peoples, ethics, and linguistic data. See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 49–60
  56. ISO (Int. Organ. Stand.). 2007. ISO 639-3:2007. Codes for the representation of names of languages—Part 3: Alpha-3 code for comprehensive coverage of languages Geneva: ISO https://www.iso.org/standard/39534.html
  57. Jones C, Li W, Almeida A, German A. 2019. Evaluating cross-linguistic forced alignment of conversational data in north Australian Kriol, an under-resourced language. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 13:281–99
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Joshi P, Santy S, Budhiraja A, Bali K, Choudhury M. 2020. The state and fate of linguistic diversity and inclusion in the NLP world. Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics6282–93 Stroudsburg, PA: Assoc. Comput. Linguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Kaufman D, Finkel R. 2018. Kratylos: a tool for sharing interlinearized and lexical data in diverse formats. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 12:124–46
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Kelly P, Cowell A. Forthcoming. Northern Arapaho virtual reality linguistic elicitation. Lang. Doc. Descr. 22:
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Kempton T, Pearce M. 2020. Corpus phonetics for under-documented languages: a vowel harmony example. Proceedings of the 2019 Annual Meeting on Phonology Amherst, MA: Annu. Meet. Phonol https://doi.org/10.3765/amp.v8i0.4682
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  62. Kettig T. 2021. Haʻina ʻia mai ana ka puana: the vowels of ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi PhD Thesis Univ. Hawaiʻi, Mānoa:
  63. Koenig A, Ringersma J, Trilsbeek P 2009. The Language Archiving Technology domain. Human Language Technology as a Challenge for Computer Science and Linguistics Z Vetulani 295–99 Nijmegen, Neth: Max Planck Inst. Psycholinguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Kung SS, Sullivant R, Pojman E, Niwagaba A. 2020. Archiving for the Future: Simple Steps for Archiving Language Documentation Collections https://archivingforthefuture.teachable.com
  65. Larsson J, Burenhult N, Kruspe N, Purves RS, Rothstein M, Sercombe P. 2021. Integrating behavioral and geospatial data on the timeline: towards new dimensions of analysis. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 24:11–13
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Lee NH. 2022. Managing data for writing a reference grammar. See Berez-Kroeker et al. 2022 287–300
  67. Leonard WY. 2017. Producing language reclamation by decolonizing ‘language.’ Lang. Doc. Descr. 14:15–36
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Leonard WY. 2021. Language reclamation through relational language work Plenary address presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 4–7. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/items/68e60bf6-f82e-4f59-83e5-444275f5cfdf
  69. Li X, Dalmia S, Li J, Lee M, Littell P, Yao J et al. 2020. Universal phone recognition with a multilingual allophone system. arXiv:2002.11800 [cs.CL]
  70. Linguistics in the Pub. 2020a. Fieldwork at a distance Online panel discussion May 20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K89TKXaJNjU
  71. Linguistics in the Pub. 2020b. Innovating and adapting to Covid-19 restrictions Online panel discussion June 23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-E_hxcdaoQ
  72. Lüdeling A 2012. A corpus linguistics perspective on language documentation, data, and the challenge of small corpora. Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication 3: Potentials of Language Documentation: Methods, Analyses, and Utilization F Siefart, G Haig, NP Himmelmann, D Jung, A Margetts, P Trillsbeek 32–38 Honolulu: Univ. Hawaiʻi Press
     [Google Scholar]
  73. McAuliffe M, Socolof M, Mihuc S, Wagner M, Sonderegger M. 2017. Montreal forced aligner: trainable text-speech alignment using Kaldi Paper presented at Interspeech 2017498–502 Stockholm: Aug. 20–24. https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/interspeech_2017/mcauliffe17_interspeech.html
  74. Meakins F, Green J, Turpin M. 2018. Understanding Linguistic Fieldwork London: Routledge
  75. Michailovsky B, Mazaudon M, Michaud A, Guillaume S, François A, Adamou E. 2014. Documenting and researching endangered languages: the Pangloss Collection. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 8:119–35
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Moeller SR. 2014. Review of SayMore, a tool for Language Documentation Productivity. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 8:66–74
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Moran S, Cysouw M. 2018. The Unicode Cookbook for Linguists: Managing Writing Systems Using Orthography Profiles Berlin: Lang. Sci.
  78. Nathan D. 2010. Sound and unsound practices in documentary linguistics: towards an epistemology for audio. Lang. Doc. Descr. 7:262–84
     [Google Scholar]
  79. O'Meara C, Good J. 2010. Ethical issues in legacy language resources. Lang. Commun. 30:162–70
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Pandey A. 2021. Fieldwork via mobile interviewing during Covid-19: a case study of Kanauji. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 4–7. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/items/a7e7e732-7906-40a7-8e15-a277961f751e
  81. Pentangelo J. 2020. 360° video and language documentation: towards a corpus of Kanien'kéha (Mohawk) PhD Thesis The Graduate Center, City University of New York
  82. Possemato F, Blythe J, de Dear C, Dahmen J, Gardner R, Stirling L. 2021. Using a geospatial approach to document and analyse locational points in face-to-face conversation. Lang. Doc. Descr. 20:313–51
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Pride K, Tomlin N, AnderBois S. 2020. LingView: a web interface for viewing FLEx and ELAN files. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 14:87–107
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Reiman DW. 2010. Basic oral language documentation. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 4:254–68
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Rice A, Dagua Toquetón B. 2021. Collaborative corpus work at a distance: building a remote workflow around YouTube. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 4–7
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Robinson LC. 2010. Informed consent among analog people in a digital world. Lang. Commun. 30:3186–91
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Rosenfelder I, Fruehwald J, Evanini K, Seyfarth S, Gorman K et al. 2014. FAVE (Forced Alignment and Vowel Extraction) Program Suite v1.2.2 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9846
    [Crossref]
  88. Running Wolf M, Running Wolf C. 2017. Reigniting the many voices of a communal bison hunt in virtual reality Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Feb. 26–Mar. 1. http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/42023
  89. Rytting CA, Yelle J. 2017. DECCA repurposed: detecting transcription inconsistencies without an orthographic standard. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on the Use of Computational Methods in the Study of Endangered Languages116–21 Honolulu: Assoc. Comput. Linguist.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Schiel F. 1999. Automatic phonetic transcription of non-prompted speech. Proceedings of the ICPhS607–10 London: Int. Phon. Assoc https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS1999/papers/p14_0607.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Schwartz L, Chen E 2017. Liinnaqumalghiit: a web-based tool for addressing orthographic transparency in St. Lawrence Island/Central Siberian Yupik. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 11:275–88
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Seifart F, Evans N, Hammarström H, Levinson SC. 2018. Language documentation twenty-five years on. Language 94:4e324–45
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Seyfeddinipur M, Ameka F, Bolton L, Blumtritt J, Carpenter B et al. 2019. Public access to research data in language documentation: challenges and possible strategies. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 13:545–63
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Seyfeddinipur M, Rau F. 2020. Keeping it real: video data in language documentation and language archiving. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 14:503–19
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Shepard M. 2014. Review of Mukurtu content management system. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 8:315–25
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Shepard MA. 2015.. “ The substance of self-determination:” language, culture, archives and sovereignty PhD Thesis Univ. Br. Columbia
  97. Shepard MA. 2016. The value-added language archive: increasing cultural compatibility for Native American communities. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 10:458–79
     [Google Scholar]
  98. SIL International. 2022. FieldWorks Language Explorer 9.0 [software]. https://software.sil.org/fieldworks/
  99. Silva W. 2016. Animating traditional Amazonian storytelling: new methods and lessons from the field. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 10:480–96
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Simons G, Bird S. 2003. The open language archives community: an infrastructure for distributed archiving of language resources. Lit. Linguist. Comp. 18:2117–28
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Sloetjes H, Wittenburg P. 2008. Annotation by category - ELAN and ISO DCR. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation816–20 Paris: Eur. Lang. Resour. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Strunk J, Schiel F, Seifart F. 2014. Untrained forced alignment of transcriptions and audio for language documentation corpora using WebMAUS. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation3940–47 Paris: Eur. Lang. Resour. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Surma A, Truong CL. Forthcoming. Digital tools for language revitalization. Handbook of Languages and Linguistics of North America C Jany, K Rice, M Mithun Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton
     [Google Scholar]
  104. TLA (The Lang. Arch.). 2020. Arbil information, manuals & download. TLA Forums https://archive.mpi.nl/forums/t/arbil-information-manuals-download/1045
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Thieberger N. 2016. Results of the metadata survey. Endangered Languages and Cultures Blog, June 6 https://www.paradisec.org.au/blog/2016/06/results-of-the-metadata-survey/
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Thieberger N, Berez AL 2011. Linguistic data management. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Fieldwork N Thieberger 90–118 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Thieberger N, La Rosa M. 2021. Collection data management and repatriation of archival materials back to their source communities Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Mar. 4–7
  108. Trilsbeek P. 2021. Potential directions in the data repository landscape Paper presented at the PARADISEC@100 conference Melbourne: Feb. 17–19
  109. Trilsbeek P, Wittenburg P 2006. Archiving challenges. Essentials of Language Documentation J Gippert, N Himmelmann, U Mosel 311–62 New York: De Gruyter Mouton
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Warner N. 2014. Sharing of data as it relates to human subjects issues and data management plans. Lang. Linguist. Compass. 8:512–18
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Wasson C, Holton G, Roth HS. 2016. Bringing user-centered design to the field of language archives. Lang. Doc. Conserv. 10:641–81
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Watanabe S, Hori T, Karita S, Hayashi T, Nishitoba J et al. 2018. ESPnet: End-to-End Speech Processing Toolkit. arXiv:1804.00015 [cs.CL]
  113. West L, Hucklebridge S, Mantla R, Lafferty L, Steinwand T, Welch N. 2019. Creating video games for language revitalization and pedagogy Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Language Documentation & Conservation Honolulu: Feb. 28–Mar. 3. http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/44812
  114. Wilkinson M, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, Appleton G, Axton M et al. 2016. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3:160018
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Williams N, Silva WDL, McPherson L, Good J. 2021. COVID-19 and documentary linguistics: some ways forward. Lang. Doc. Descr. 20:359–77
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Wisniewski G, Michaud A, Guillaume S 2020. Phonemic transcription of low-resource languages: To what extent can preprocessing be automated?. Proceedings of the 1st Joint SLTU (Spoken Language Technologies for Under-resourced languages) and CCURL (Collaboration and Computing for Under-Resourced Languages) Workshop, 2020 Marseille, France 306–15 Paris: Eur. Lang. Resour. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Woodbury AC 2011. Language documentation. The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages PK Austin, J Sallbank 159–86 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Woodbury AC. 2014. Archives and audiences: toward making endangered language documentations people can read, use, understand, and admire. Lang. Doc. Descr. 12:19–36
     [Google Scholar]
  119. Yarbrough D, Solomon NH 2019. Animated Haʻi Moʻolelo ʻŌiwi: place-based pedagogy in practice. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Graduate Student Conference of the College of LLL N Handley, RL Hughes 104–10 Honolulu: Univ. Hawai'i Press
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504
Loading
Recent Advances in Technologies for Resource Creation and Mobilization in Language Documentation
Annual Review of Linguistics 9, 195 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-120504
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error