The National Corpus of Kazakh Language: Development of Phonetic and Prosodic Markers

Tempo. The beginning is slow, but the third and fourth syntagms are marked with intense tempo along with the placement of logical stress there, and then the tempo slows down at the end. In general, the tempo is necessary for identifying important and unimportant parts of the utterance and solidifying the idea.

Pauses. There are five pauses in the sentence. Each pause signifies the completion of an idea and has a role in distinguishing between the separate syntagms. Pauses, on the one hand, are physiological, but on the other hand they show the tidiness of the thought from the logical viewpoint.

<Мацдайында -| цызыл жулдузы жарцыраган | шошац шілемніц | ек' 'цулагын | ійегіме цамзау етіп -| байладым да, > | алдымен ауул жацца гарадым > - this sentence consists of eight syntagms.

Melody and intensity. The first syntagma starts with a rising intoneme, and the in- between of the second and fourth syntagms is pronounced flatly. The fifts and the sixth syn- tagms are unfinished, thus they have a rising tone. Then the intoneme is flat again, and there is a fall at the end. Through the intonemes, a complete idea is conveyed here.

Tempo. The sentence starts slowly and intensifies in the middle only to slow down at the end. As the experimental research indicates, slow tempo refers to the significant parts of the sentence, while the increased tempo shows that this part of the sentence is unimportant.

Pauses. There are seven pauses in this sentence. These pauses, while being physiological, are also utilized to convey the meaning of the sentence and the complete idea.

To summarize, the orthography of words and phrases was given, the sentence was divided into syntagms, and intonemas were placed in the prosodic notation. Prosodic marking cannot be automated immediately. In the oral subcorpus, an algorithm is provided for the automation of the text, but it is carried out manually because it cannot cover the entire oral text. Later, as the scope of the database expands and the algorithm is improved, the text will be fully automated.

Conclusion

To conclude, the first national corpus of the Kazakh language showed lighter and simpler notations, and included the least amount of text (10 million). In this regard, now the scope of the corpus, breadth of information is increasing, the quality of marking and all parameters and sub-corpus resources are being supplemented. One of them is the prosod-

References ic marking contained in the national corpus of the Kazakh language. Prosodic marking mainly consists of oral texts. The audio recordings of classical writers, modern poets and writers, public figures were included. In the oral texts, the speaker's orthography, prosodic features, and intonation decoration were clearly shown. In order for the user of the national corpus to distinguish between the standard orthography of the Kazakh language and the orthography of the speaker, as well as to determine the level of the correct pronunciation of the word, a prosodic marking was given. As for the question of how the user compares the normalized spelling and the speaker's orthography, clicking on a word in the spoken text with prosodic marking will show its normalized spelling, intonation features, and its audio.

The oral subcorpus of the Kazakh language is supplemented and improved with texts over the years. To automate it, the Praat program and the algorithm work together and expand the scope of the database. The algorithm has been developed on the basis of researches in the field of segmental and supersegmental phonetics of Kazakh linguistics and serves as the basis for text automation.

Литература

1. Amiyeva, A.M., Filimonov, V.V., Sergeyev, A.P. (2016). [and others]. 2^nd International conference of students, Masters, and young scientists “Informational technologies, telecommunications and systems of management”: a collection of reports. Ekaterinburg: [URFU], 9, 251-260.

2. Aralbayev, Zh. (1988). Kazakh fonetikasy boiynsha etudter [Studies on the Kazakh phonetics]. Almaty: Science, 13, 144. (In Kazakh).

3. Baitursynov, A. (1992). Til tagylymy [Study of the language]. Almaty: Ana tili, 12, 448.

4. Bazarbayeva, Z.M. (2015). Universal Properties of Intonation Components. Review of European Studies, 8, 226-230. Available at: https://www.google.com/url_(accessed 22 February 2022)

5. Bazarbayeva, Z.M. (2012). Kazakh phonologiyasynyn negizderi [Basics of the Kazakh phonology]. Almaty, 15, 120. (In Kazakh)

6. Bazarbayeva, Z.M. (2016). Korpus kazakhskogoyazika:prosodicheskaya razmetka [Corpus of the Kazakh language: prosodic marking]. InMezhdunarodnyjzhurnalprikladnyh ifundamental'nyh issledovanij [International Journal of Applied and Fundamental Studies], available at: https://applied-research.ru/ru/ article/view, 16, 334-337 (In Russ.) (accessed 15 March 2022)

7. Bazarbayeva, Z.M. (2002). Kazirgi Kazakh tili intonatsiyasynyn negizderi [Basics of contemporary Kazakh intonation]. Almaty: Complex, 20, 202. (In Kazakh)

8. Grishina, E.A., Savchuk, S.O. (2008). Korpus zvuchashey russkoy rechi v sostave natsionalnogo kor- pusa russkogo yazika [The corpus of Russian oral speech in the framework of the national corpus of the Russian language]. Proceedings of the International Conference “Dialogue 2008”. 7, 125-136.

9. Kenesbayev, I.K., Musabayev, G. (1975). Qazirgi qazaq tili: Leksika, fonetika, [Modem Kazakh: Lexis, Phonetics], 17, 156. (In Kazakh)

10. Manasbayev, B., Balakayev, M., Tomanov, M., Zhanpeyisov, E. (1974). Kazakh tilinin stilistikasy [Stylistics of the Kazakh language]. Almaty, 14, 190. (In Kazakh)

11. Meyer, Ch. F. (2002). English Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3, 168.

12. McEnery, T., Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1, 235.

13. Quirk, R. Svartvik, J., Quirk, R. (1980). A corpus of English Conversation. - Lund: Gleerup, 2, 893.

14. Sovremenniy russkiy yazik. Teoria. Analiz yazikovyh edinitz. [E. I. Dibrova, L. L. Kasatkin, N. A. Ni- kolina, I. I. Scheboleva]. Edited by E. I. Dibrova. (2006). [Contemporary Russian language. Theory. Analysis of linguistic units]. Moscow: «Academia” publishing house, 480. (In Russ.)

15. Svetozarova, N.D. (1982). Intonatsionnaya sistema russkogo yazika [Intonational system of the Russian language]. Leningrad: the publishing house of Leningrad university, 19, 173. (In Russ.).

16. Zakharov, V.P. (2005). Korpusnaya lingvistika: uchebno-metod. posobiye. [Corpus linguistics: an educational-methodological toolkit]. (In Russ.), Saint Petersburg, 6, 48.

17. Zhubanov, A.K., Zhanabekova, A.A. (2016). Korpustyk lingvistika [Corpus linguistics]. Almaty, «The Kazakh language» publishing house, 5, 336. (In Kazakh)

18. Zhubanov, K. (1966). Kazakh tili boiynsha zertteuler [Studies of the Kazakh language]. Almaty: Science, 11, 362. (In Kazakh)

19. Zhunisbek, A. (2018). Kazakh til biliminin maseleleri [Issues of Kazakh linguistics]. Almaty: Abzal- ay, 18, 368. (In Kazakh)

20. Chilingaryan, K.P. (2021). Korpusnaya lingvistika: teoria vs metodologia [Corpus linguistics: theory vs methodology]. In RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 4, 196-218. (In Russ.)

Размещено на Allbest.ru