Cross-Linguistic Nasalance Comparisons: A Review of Speech Sample Sets and Preliminary Consideration of Effect of Lexical Tone.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1159/000541513
Joanna Hoi-Man She, Emily See-Man Ching, Wilson Shing Yu, Kathy Yuet-Sheung Lee, Michael Chi-Fai Tong, Valerie J Pereira
{"title":"Cross-Linguistic Nasalance Comparisons: A Review of Speech Sample Sets and Preliminary Consideration of Effect of Lexical Tone.","authors":"Joanna Hoi-Man She, Emily See-Man Ching, Wilson Shing Yu, Kathy Yuet-Sheung Lee, Michael Chi-Fai Tong, Valerie J Pereira","doi":"10.1159/000541513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Nasalance is an acoustic representation of perceived nasality with proven clinical and research utility. Its validity is contingent on appropriate speech sample sets and distinct normative databases based on known impact factors such as language and phonetic environment, but little is known about the potential effects of lexical tone on nasalance. Its use in international cross-linguistic studies necessitates definition and added considerations of speech sampling protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Part I: a methodological review was undertaken using PRISMA (2020), the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist for evaluating the risk of bias, and calculation of effect sizes and/or visual displays using tables showing the grouping of similar data for the synthesis of findings. Part II: a pilot study explored the effect of lexical tone on nasalance in Cantonese, a lexical tone language.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Part I: a total of 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addressing possible confounders and minimizing the risk of bias, 13 studies were assigned an overall quality rating of acceptable (+) and the remaining 4, a high rating (++). For the 9-word string, there was a (non-clinical) difference of 3-5% between Swedish and Brazilian-Portuguese, and a moderate effect size for age (d = 0.49); for the consonant-vowel syllables set, clinical differences across languages were identified for adults and between 5 and 10% for children and adolescents. Part II: the pilot study showed a significant effect of lexical tone on nasalance, where nasalance for the high-level tone 1 was significantly higher than that for high-rising tone 2, low-rising tone 5, and low-falling tone 4.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is a need for further evidence from other languages, including tonal languages, to better define the evidence and speech methodology of international cross-linguistic nasalance studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12114,"journal":{"name":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","volume":" ","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541513","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Nasalance is an acoustic representation of perceived nasality with proven clinical and research utility. Its validity is contingent on appropriate speech sample sets and distinct normative databases based on known impact factors such as language and phonetic environment, but little is known about the potential effects of lexical tone on nasalance. Its use in international cross-linguistic studies necessitates definition and added considerations of speech sampling protocol.

Methods: Part I: a methodological review was undertaken using PRISMA (2020), the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Methodology Checklist for evaluating the risk of bias, and calculation of effect sizes and/or visual displays using tables showing the grouping of similar data for the synthesis of findings. Part II: a pilot study explored the effect of lexical tone on nasalance in Cantonese, a lexical tone language.

Results: Part I: a total of 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addressing possible confounders and minimizing the risk of bias, 13 studies were assigned an overall quality rating of acceptable (+) and the remaining 4, a high rating (++). For the 9-word string, there was a (non-clinical) difference of 3-5% between Swedish and Brazilian-Portuguese, and a moderate effect size for age (d = 0.49); for the consonant-vowel syllables set, clinical differences across languages were identified for adults and between 5 and 10% for children and adolescents. Part II: the pilot study showed a significant effect of lexical tone on nasalance, where nasalance for the high-level tone 1 was significantly higher than that for high-rising tone 2, low-rising tone 5, and low-falling tone 4.

Discussion: There is a need for further evidence from other languages, including tonal languages, to better define the evidence and speech methodology of international cross-linguistic nasalance studies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨语言鼻音比较:语音样本集回顾与词调影响的初步考虑。
简介鼻音是一种感知鼻音的声学表征,具有公认的临床和研究用途。其有效性取决于适当的语音样本集和基于已知影响因素(如语言和语音环境)的独特标准数据库,但人们对词调对鼻音的潜在影响知之甚少。在国际跨语言研究中使用该方法需要对语音采样协议进行定义和补充考虑:第一部分:采用 PRISMA(2020 年)、苏格兰校际指南网络 (SIGN) 方法检查表(用于评估偏倚风险)、效应大小计算和/或可视化显示(使用表格显示相似数据的分组,以综合研究结果)进行方法学综述。第二部分一项试验性研究探讨了广东话(一种词性语调语言)中词性语调对鼻音的影响:第一部分:17 项研究符合纳入标准。为解决可能存在的混杂因素并尽量减少偏倚风险,13 项研究的总体质量评级为 (+) 可接受,其余 4 项为高评级 (++)。在 9 个单词串方面,瑞典语和巴西葡萄牙语之间的(非临床)差异为 3-5%,年龄效应大小适中(d=0.49);在辅音-元音音节集(CV 集)方面,不同语言之间的临床差异在成人中有所体现,在儿童和青少年中则在 5-10% 之间。第二部分试验研究表明,词调对鼻音有显著影响,其中高调 1 的鼻音显著高于高升调 2、低升调 5 和低降调 4:需要从其他语言(包括声调语言)中获得更多证据,以更好地界定国际跨语言鼻音研究的证据和语音方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica
Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Published since 1947, ''Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica'' provides a forum for international research on the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of structures of the speech, language, and hearing mechanisms. Original papers published in this journal report new findings on basic function, assessment, management, and test development in communication sciences and disorders, as well as experiments designed to test specific theories of speech, language, and hearing function. Review papers of high quality are also welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Effects of Puree Type and Color on Ratings of Pharyngeal Residue, Penetration, and Aspiration during FEES: A Prospective Study of 37 Dysphagic Outpatient Adults. Within- and cross-language generalization in narrative production of bilingual persons with aphasia following Semantic Feature Analysis therapy. Preliminary Investigation of Context-Aware AAC with Automated Just-in-Time Cloze Phrase Response Options for Social Participation from Children on the Autism Spectrum. The Relationship between Traditional Acoustic Measures and Cepstral Analysis of Voice. Cross-Linguistic Nasalance Comparisons: A Review of Speech Sample Sets and Preliminary Consideration of Effect of Lexical Tone.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1