Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Part of a Book (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Keywords
- Historische Phonetik (5) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (3)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-review (3)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Peer-Review (1)
Publisher
- TUDpress (4)
- Akademie-Verlag (1)
Wolfgang von Kempelen's book "The Mechanism of Human Speech" from 1791 is a famous milestone in the history of speech communication research. It has an enormous relevance for the phonetic sciences and it marks an important turning point for the development of the (mechanical) speech synthesis. So far no English version of this work was available, which excludes many interested researchers. Access to the original versions in German and French is restricted for various reasons. For example the blackletter script of the German version is troublesome for most of today's readers. We report here on a new edition of Kempelen's book which unites a better readable German version and its English translation. It will now also be in a searchable electronic format and has been enriched with many commentaries, which aid in the understanding of details of the late 18th century that are little known or unknown to many researchers today.
There are a number of recent replicas of Wolfgang von Kempelen's speaking machine. Although all of them are explicitly based on Kempelen's own description nearly none of them are identical in construction and sound. In this paper we want to illustrate some of these differences and their reasons for five replicas built by ourselves.
Das 18. Jahrhundert war wissenschaftlich von großen Umbrüchen geprägt, auch im Bereich der Anatomie und Physiologie des Menschen. Die hierauserwachsende lebhafte Diskussion erstreckte sich auch auf das noch sehr junge Gebiet der (mechanischen) Sprachsynthese und ihrer Grundlagen. Das Sprachsynthesekonzept Wolfgang von Kempelens (1734–1804) ist hierbei ein besonders eindrückliches Beispiel dafür, dass eine grundlegende wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis womöglich durch technologische Limitationen nicht notwendigerweise auch praktisch umgesetzt werden kann. Grundsätzlich waren Kempelens Erkenntnisse zur Anatomie und Physiologie des Menschen und damit auch zur Spracherzeugung weitestgehend zutreffend. Die praktische Umsetzung hingegen wirkt aus heutiger Sicht recht kurios. Kempelens Vokaltrakt-Konzept soll exemplarisch dem nur wenig früher entstandenen Prototypen zur Sprachsynthese Christian Gottlieb Kratzensteins (1723–1795) gegenübergestellt werden. Dessen „Erkenntnisse“ müssen heute vielfach als falsch bezeichnet werden; sein Modell zur Vokalsynthese weist einerseits auffällige Parallelen zu demjenigen KEMPELENS auf, geht hinsichtlich der Physiologie jedoch von vielfach irrigen Annahmen aus.
One was a distinguished natural scientist and engineer, the other a self-taught scientist and vilified as a conman: Christian Gottlieb Kratzenstein (1723–1795) and Wolfgang von Kempelen (1734–1804). Some of the former’s postula-tions on human physiology and articulation of speech proved wrong in later years. Most of the latter’s theories are considered applicable even today. The perhaps most contrasting approaches to speech synthesis during the 18th century are linked to their names. There are many essential differences between their approaches which show that these two researchers were not only representatives of different schools of thought, but also representatives of two different scientific eras. A speculative and philosophical approach on the one hand versus an empirical and logical approach on the other hand. Both Kratzenstein and Kempelen published books on their research. But while the “Tentamen” [4] of the physician Kratzen-stein remains rather vague and imprecise in its descriptions of vowel production and synthesis, the “Mechanismus” [8] of the engineer Kempelen shows much more precision and correctness in almost every respect of human speech and lan-guage. The goal of this paper is to discuss the differences between these two con-temporaneous researchers on speech synthesis and to compare their theories with present-days findings.