Literary and Colloquial Tamil Dialect Identification
This work addresses a specific need in human-computer interaction and language preservation for Tamil speakers, but it is incremental as it applies existing methods to a new dialect identification task.
The paper tackled the problem of identifying between Literary Tamil (LT) and Colloquial Tamil (CT) dialects, an unexplored area, and achieved high identification accuracies up to 95.61% using methods like UPR-2 with P-LVCSR on short test utterances.
Culture and language evolve together. The old literary form of Tamil is used commonly for writing and the contemporary colloquial Tamil is used for speaking. Human-computer interaction applications require Colloquial Tamil (CT) to make it more accessible and easy for the everyday user and, it requires Literary Tamil (LT) when information is needed in a formal written format. Continuing the use of LT alongside CT in computer aided language learning applications will both preserve LT, and provide ease of use via CT, at the same time. Hence there is a need for the conversion between LT and CT dialects, which demands as a first step, dialect identification. Dialect Identification (DID) of LT and CT is an unexplored area of research. In the current work, keeping the nuances of both these dialects in mind, five methods are explored which include two implicit methods - Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN); two explicit methods - Parallel Phone Recognition (PPR) and Parallel Large Vocabulary Continuous Speech Recognition (P-LVCSR); two versions of the proposed explicit Unified Phone Recognition method (UPR-1 and UPR-2). These methods vary based on: the need for annotated data, the size of the unit, the way in which modelling is carried out, and the way in which the final decision is made. Even though the average duration of the test utterances is less - 4.9s for LT and 2.5s for CT - the systems performed well, offering the following identification accuracies: 87.72% (GMM), 93.97% (CNN), 89.24% (PPR), 94.21% (P-LVCSR), 88.57% (UPR-1), 93.53% (UPR-1 with P-LVCSR), 94.55% (UPR-2), and 95.61% (UPR-2 with P-LVCSR).