Common Turkic Alphabet and the Impact of Phonetic Structure on Natural Language Processing Applications: An Exploratory Review and Future Directions

Abstract

Phonetic analysis is a branch of Natural Language Processing (DDİ) that examines how sounds are produced during speech and how words are related to these sounds. Because computers must understand both the mechanism of sound formation and the lexical, syntactic, and semantic aspects of languages, this is a highly demanding task. Although its historical roots date back centuries, in recent years researchers have adopted a broader perspective on phonetic analysis by focusing on various languages spoken worldwide. One of the greatest challenges in phonetics and phonology is achieving consistent results in tasks involving language recognition and processing (such as speech recognition and speech synthesis). In this study, the definitions of phonetics and phonology are addressed, and the methods employed by different researchers are examined. Additionally, the potential phonetic impacts of the Common Turkic Alphabet are discussed, providing detailed information about this alphabet. Furthermore, proposals for new algorithms or metrics to measure writing-pronunciation alignment and future directions in this field are highlighted.

Keywords

• Natural Language Processing
• Phonetic Analysis
• Common Turkic Alphabet
• Orthography-Phonology Correspondence

Ortak Türk Abecesi ve Ses Yapısının Doğal Dil İşleme Uygulamaları Üzerindeki Etkisi: Keşifsel bir Derleme ve Gelecek Yönelimler

Abstract

Fonetik analiz, konuşma sırasında seslerin nasıl üretildiğini ve sözcüklerin seslerle nasıl ilişkilendirildiğini inceleyen Doğal Dil İşleme (DDİ) konusunun bir dalıdır. Bilgisayarların bu süreci anlayıp değerlendirebilmesi, hem sesin oluşum mekanizmasını hem de dillerin sözcüksel, sözdizimsel ve anlamsal yönlerini dikkate almayı gerektirdiğinden oldukça zorlu bir çalışmadır. Tarihsel kökleri yüzyıllar öncesine uzansa da, son yıllarda araştırmacılar dünya çapında konuşulan çeşitli dilleri ele alarak fonetik analizi daha geniş bir bakış açısıyla değerlendirmiştir. Fonetik ve fonolojinin en büyük güçlüklerinden biri, dili tanıma ve işleme süreçlerinde (örneğin konuşma tanıma ve konuşma sentezi) tutarlı sonuçlar elde etmektir. Bu çalışmada, fonetik ve fonoloji kavramlarının tanımlarına değinilirken, farklı araştırmacıların benimsediği yöntemler incelenmektedir. Ek olarak, Ortak Türk Alfabesinin potansiyel fonetik etkileri tartışılarak bu alfabe hakkında detaylı bilgiler sunulmaktadır. Ayrıca, yazı-telaffuz uyumunu ölçmek için yeni algoritmaların veya metriklerin geliştirilmesine yönelik öneriler ve gelecekte izlenebilecek yönelimler de vurgulanmaktadır.

Keywords

• Doğal Dil İşleme
• Fonetik Analiz
• Ortak Türk Alfabesi
• Ortografi-Fonoloji Uyumu

References

1. Davenport, M., Hannahs, S. J. Introducing Phonetics and Phonology (4th ed.), Routledge, 2020.
2. Bar-Yosef, Y., Aloni-Lavi, R., Opher, I., Lotner, N., Tetariy, E., Silber-Varod, V., Moyal, A. Automatic learning of phonetic mappings for cross-language phonetic-search in keyword spotting, 2012 IEEE 27th Convention of Electrical and Electronics Engineers in Israel, IEEE, 2012, pp. 1-5.
3. Hanumanthappa, M., Rashmi, S., Jyothi, N. M. Impact of Phonetics in Natural Language Processing: A Literature Survey, IIJISET–International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, 1(3), 2014.
4. Lewis, G. The Turkish Language Reform: A Catastrophic Success, Oxford University Press, 1999.
5. Shoibekova, G. B., Odanova, S. A., Sultanova, B. M., Yermekova, T. N. Vowel Harmony is a Basic Phonetic Rule of the Turkic Languages, Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2016.
6. Choi, H., Choi, M., Kim, S., Lim, Y., Lee, M., Yun, S., Kim, S. H. Spoken-to-written text conversion for enhancement of Korean–English readability and machine translation, ETRI Journal, 46(1), 127-136, 2024.
7. Cedden, G., Aydın, Ö. Do non-native languages have an effect on word order processing in first language Turkish?, International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(4), 804-816, 2019.
8. Reed, M., Levis, J. M. The handbook of English pronunciation, John Wiley & Sons, 2019.

9. Ocal, T., Ehri, L. Spelling pronunciations help college students remember how to spell difficult words, Reading and Writing, 30, 947-967, 2017.
10. Chiang, C. Y., Li, W. H., Lin, Y. T., Su, J. J., Chen, W. C., Kao, C. C., Chen, S. H. The Speech Labeling and Modeling Toolkit (SLMTK) Version 1.0, 2022 25th Conference of the Oriental COCOSDA International Committee for the Co-ordination and Standardisation of Speech Databases and Assessment Techniques (O-COCOSDA), IEEE, 2022, pp. 1-5.
11. Jurafsky, D., Martin, J. H. Speech and Language Processing (3rd ed.), Prentice Hall, 2000.
12. Yu, M., Nguyen, H. D., Sokolov, A., Lepird, J., Sathyendra, K. M., Choudhary, S., Kunzmann, S. Multilingual grapheme-to-phoneme conversion with byte representation, ICASSP 2020 – 2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), IEEE, 2020, pp. 8234-8238.
13. Yang, J., McCandliss, B. D., Shu, H., Zevin, J. D. Simulating language-specific and language-general effects in a statistical learning model of Chinese reading, Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 238-257, 2009.
14. Schmidtke, D., Conrad, M. Effects of affective phonological iconicity in online language processing: Evidence from a letter search task, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(10), 1544, 2018.
15. Oflazer, K. Spelling correction in agglutinative languages, arXiv preprint cmp-lg/9410004, 1994.
16. Hmooda, S. S., Jasimb, B. H. A Study of the Syntactic Phonological Interface in English Sentence Form, 2020.
17. Çöltekin, Ç. Improving successor variety for morphological segmentation, LOT Occasional Series, 16, 13-28, 2010.
18. Oflazer, K. Turkish and its challenges for language processing, Language Resources and Evaluation, 48, 639-653, 2014.
19. Atabey, İ. Türkçe-Yazı İlişkisi ve Bağımsızlıklarının 30. Yılında Türk Cumhuriyetlerinde Abece, International Journal of Volga-Ural and Turkestan Studies, 6(2), 207-220, 2024.
20. Common Turkic alphabet. Wikipedia, Erişim Tarihi: 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Turkic_alphabet.
21. Dees, J. Non-uniformity in phonologizing phase heads: Evidence from Kazakh, Proceedings of the Workshop on Turkic and Languages in Contact with Turkic, 2023.
22. Aliyeva, E. Yeni Uygur Türkçesinin Dil Özellikleri ve Azerbaycan Türkçesiyle Ortaklıklar, Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi, 9(2), 484-499, 2022.
23. Seddiq, Y., Alotaibi, Y. A., Selouani, S. A., Meftah, A. H. Distinctive phonetic features modeling and extraction using deep neural networks, IEEE Access, 7, 81382-81396, 2019.
24. Huang, Z., Epps, J., Joachim, D., Sethu, V. Natural language processing methods for acoustic and landmark event-based features in speech-based depression detection, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 14(2), 435-448, 2019.
25. Kukanov, I., Trong, T. N., Hautamäki, V., Siniscalchi, S. M., Salerno, V. M., Lee, K. A. Maximal figure-of-merit framework to detect multi-label phonetic features for spoken language recognition, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 28, 682-695, 2020.
26. Nair, J., Ahammed, R. English to Indian Language and Back Transliteration with Phonetic Transcription for Computational Linguistics Tools based on Conventional Transliteration Schemes, 2021 Fourth International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT), IEEE, 2021, pp. 1-6.
27. Vykhovanets, V. S., Du, J., Sakulin, S. A. An overview of phonetic encoding algorithms, Automation and Remote Control, 81, 1896-1910, 2020.
28. Kavros, A., Tzitzikas, Y. SoundexGR: An algorithm for phonetic matching for the Greek language, Natural Language Engineering, 29(5), 1305-1340, 2023.
29. El-Imam, Y. A., Don, Z. M. Rules and algorithms for phonetic transcription of standard Malay, IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 88(10), 2354-2372, 2005.
30. Almeida, G. A. D. M. Using phonetic knowledge in tools and resources for Natural Language Processing and Pronunciation Evaluation, Doktora Tezi, Universidade de São Paulo, 2016.
31. Żelasko, P., Moro-Velázquez, L., Hasegawa-Johnson, M., Scharenborg, O., Dehak, N. That sounds familiar: an analysis of phonetic representations transfer across languages, arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.08118, 2020.
32. Nazarov, A. I. Learning phonetically and phonologically natural classes through constraint indexation, Proceedings of the Annual Meetings on Phonology, 2021.
33. Fang, A., Filice, S., Limsopatham, N., Rokhlenko, O. Using phoneme representations to build predictive models robust to ASR errors, Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, ACM, 2020, pp. 699-708.
34. Koffi, E. A tutorial on acoustic phonetic feature extraction for automatic speech recognition (ASR) and text-to-speech (TTS) applications in African languages, Linguistic Portfolios, 9(1), 11, 2020.
35. Lee, C. Y., Zhang, Y., Glass, J. Joint learning of phonetic units and word pronunciations for ASR, Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2013, pp. 182-192.
36. Żelasko, P., Feng, S., Velazquez, L. M., Abavisani, A., Bhati, S., Scharenborg, O., Dehak, N. Discovering phonetic inventories with crosslingual automatic speech recognition, Computer Speech & Language, 74, 101358, 2022.
37. Ungurean, C., Burileanu, D. An advanced DDİ framework for high-quality Text-to-Speech synthesis, 2011 6th Conference on Speech Technology and Human-Computer Dialogue (SpeD), IEEE, 2011, pp. 1-6.
38. Kurihara, K. Phonetic and Prosodic Features for Sequence-to-Sequence Acoustic Modeling on Japanese Text-to-Speech and Their Estimation, 2024.
39. Mukit, M., Rabbi, M. M. H., Ahmed, M. M., Latif, S., Saha, S. Sentiment Analysis on Bangla and Phonetic Bangla Reviews: A Product Rating Procedure using DDİ and Machine Learning, 2023 IEEE 9th International Women in Engineering (WIE) Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (WIECON-ECE), IEEE, 2023, pp. 433-437.
40. Peng, H., Ma, Y., Poria, S., Li, Y., Cambria, E. Phonetic-enriched text representation for Chinese sentiment analysis with reinforcement learning, Information Fusion, 70, 88-99, 2021.
41. Kabir, M. M., Mridha, M. F., Shin, J., Jahan, I., Ohi, A. Q. A survey of speaker recognition: Fundamental theories, recognition methods and opportunities, IEEE Access, 9, 79236-79263, 2021.
42. Ohi, A. Q., Mridha, M. F., Hamid, M. A., Monowar, M. M. Deep speaker recognition: Process, progress, and challenges, IEEE Access, 9, 89619-89643, 2021.
43. Becerra, A., De La Rosa, J. I., González, E. Speech recognition in a dialog system: From conventional to deep processing: A case study applied to Spanish, Multimedia Tools and Applications, 77, 15875-15911, 2018.
44. Wilks, Y., Catizone, R., Worgan, S., Turunen, M. Some background on dialogue management and conversational speech for dialogue systems, Computer Speech & Language, 25(2), 128-139, 2011.
45. Kumar, A., Pratap, A., Singh, A. K. Generative adversarial neural machine translation for phonetic languages via reinforcement learning, IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence, 7(1), 190-199, 2022.
46. Kumar, A., Parida, S., Pratap, A., Singh, A. K. Machine translation by projecting text into the same phonetic-orthographic space using a common encoding, Sādhanā, 48(4), 238, 2023.
47. Hanumanthappa, M., Rashmi, S., Reddy, M. V. Metrics for evaluating phonetics machine translation in Natural Language Processing through modified Edit Distance algorithm-A naive approach, 2015 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI), IEEE, 2015, pp. 1-7.
48. Randhawa, E. S., Saroa, E. C. Study of spell checking techniques and available spell checkers in regional languages: a survey, International Journal For Technological Research In Engineering, 2(3), 148-151, 2014.
49. Tan, M., Chen, D., Li, Z., Wang, P. Spelling error correction with BERT based on character-phonetic, 2020 IEEE 6th International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC), IEEE, 2020, pp. 1146-1150.
50. Doshi, F., Gandhi, J., Gosalia, D., Bagul, S. Normalizing text using language modelling based on phonetics and string similarity, arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.14116, 2020.
51. Sundararaman, M. N., Kumar, A., Vepa, J. Phoneme-bert: Joint language modelling of phoneme sequence and asr transcript, arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.00804, 2021.
52. Tsvetkov, Y., Sitaram, S., Faruqui, M., Lample, G., Littell, P., Mortensen, D., Dyer, C. Polyglot neural language models: A case study in cross-lingual phonetic representation learning, arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.03832, 2016.
53. Buetler, K., Rodríguez, D., Laganaro, M., Müri, R., Nyffeler, T., Spierer, L., Annoni, J. Balanced bilinguals favor lexical processing in their opaque language and conversion system in their shallow language, Brain and Language, 150, 166-176, 2015.
54. Marjou, X. OTEANN: Estimating the Transparency of Orthographies with an Artificial Neural Network, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.13321, 2019.
55. Wagner, R., Torgesen, J. The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills, Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192-212, 1987.
56. Mitchell, J. Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Assessment for Effective Intervention, 26, 57-63, 2001.
57. Torgesen, J., Wagner, R., Rashotte, C. Longitudinal Studies of Phonological Processing and Reading, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 276-286, 1994.
58. Yang, X., McBride, C. How do phonological processing abilities contribute to early Chinese reading and mathematics?, Educational Psychology, 40, 893-911, 2020.
59. Schoenel, A., Escarce, A., Araújo, L., Lemos, S. Influence of phonological processing on poor school performance: systematic literature review., CoDAS, 32(5), e20180255, 2020.
60. Werfel, K., Hendricks, A. The Contribution of Phonological Processing to Reading and Spelling in Students With Cochlear Implants., Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 1-14, 2023.
61. Jarosz, G. Computational Modeling of Phonological Learning, Annual Review of Linguistics, 2019.
62. Koşaner, Ö., Birant, Ç. C., Aktaş, Ö. Improving Turkish language training materials: Grapheme-to-phoneme conversion for adding phonemic transcription into dictionary entries and course books, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 473-484, 2013.
63. Altinok, D. Towards Turkish ASR: Anatomy of a rule-based Turkish g2p, arXiv preprint arXiv:1601.03783, 2016.
64. Al-Bakry, P., Al-Rikaby, M. Enhanced Levenshtein Edit Distance Method functioning as a String-to-String Similarity Measure, (Yayın bilgisi kısmi), 1, 48-54, 2016.
65. Greenhill, S. Levenshtein Distances Fail to Identify Language Relationships Accurately, Computational Linguistics, 37, 689-698, 2011.
66. Maarif, H., Akmeliawati, R., Htike, Z., Gunawan, T. Complexity Algorithm Analysis for Edit Distance, 2014 International Conference on Computer and Communication Engineering, IEEE, 2014, pp. 135-137.
67. Purwins, H., Li, B., Virtanen, T., Schlüter, J., Chang, S., Sainath, T. Deep Learning for Audio Signal Processing, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 13, 206-219, 2019.
68. Nassif, A. B., Shahin, I., Attili, I., Azzeh, M., Shaalan, K. Speech recognition using deep neural networks: A systematic review, IEEE Access, 7, 19143-19165, 2019.
69. Otter, D., Medina, J., Kalita, J. A Survey of the Usages of Deep Learning for Natural Language Processing, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 32, 604-624, 2020.
70. Hatfield, H. Dynamic Approaches to Phonological Processing, 2023.
71. Adalı, E. The Logic of Turkish Language for DDİ, Journal of Problems in Computer Science and Information Technologies, 2(2), 2024.
72. Sultanova, N., Kessikbayeva, G., Amangeldi, Y. Kazakh Language Open Vocabulary Language Model with Deep Neural Networks, 2019 15th International Conference on Electronics, Computer and Computation (ICECCO), IEEE, 2019, pp. 1-4.
73. Seitkulov, Y. N., Boranbayev, S. N., Yergaliyeva, B. B., Atanov, S. K., Davydau, H. V., Patapovich, A. V. The base of speech structural units of Kazakh language for the synthesis of speech-like signals, 2018 IEEE 12th International Conference on Application of Information and Communication Technologies (AICT), IEEE, 2018, pp. 1-4.
74. Stern, N. Z., Washington, J. N. A phonetic study of length and duration in Kyrgyz vowels, Proceedings of the Workshop on Turkic and Languages in Contact with Turkic (Vol. 4), 119-131, 2019.
75. Azimov, I. M. The problem of vowels in the Uzbek language, The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations, 5(04), 73-81, 2023.
76. Alguliyev, R., Jafarov, Y., Aliguliyev, R. ICT problems of the Azerbaijani language, the Azerbaijani language problems of ICT, environment, 15(2), 3-13, 2024.