Literature DB >> 12398468

Economy of effort in different speaking conditions. I. A preliminary study of intersubject differences and modeling issues.

Joseph S Perkell1, Majid Zandipour, Melanie L Matthies, Harlan Lane.   

Abstract

This study explores the hypothesis that clear speech is produced with greater "articulatory effort" than normal speech. Kinematic and acoustic data were gathered from seven subjects as they pronounced multiple repetitions of utterances in different speaking conditions, including normal, fast, clear, and slow. Data were analyzed within a framework based on a dynamical model of single-axis frictionless movements, in which peak movement speed is used as a relative measure of articulatory effort (Nelson, 1983). There were differences in peak movement speed, distance and duration among the conditions and among the speakers. Three speakers produced the "clear" condition utterances with movements that had larger distances and durations than those for "normal" utterances. Analyses of the data within a peak speed, distance, duration "performance space" indicated increased effort (reflected in greater peak speed) in the clear condition for the three speakers, in support of the hypothesis. The remaining four speakers used other combinations of parameters to produce the clear condition. The validity of the simple dynamical model for analyzing these complex movements was considered by examining several additional parameters. Some movement characteristics differed from those required for the model-based analysis, presumably because the articulators are complicated structurally and interact with one another mechanically. More refined tests of control strategies for different speaking styles will depend on future analyses of more complicated movements with more realistic models.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12398468     DOI: 10.1121/1.1506369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  29 in total

1.  Movement goals and feedback and feedforward control mechanisms in speech production.

Authors:  Joseph S Perkell
Journal:  J Neurolinguistics       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 1.710

2.  Bidirectional clear speech perception benefit for native and high-proficiency non-native talkers and listeners: intelligibility and accentedness.

Authors:  Rajka Smiljanić; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Intelligibility and acoustic characteristics of clear and conversational speech in telugu (a South Indian dravidian language).

Authors:  Naresh Durisala; S G R Prakash; Arivudai Nambi; Ridhima Batra
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2011-04-11

4.  Temporal organization of English clear and conversational speech.

Authors:  Rajka Smiljanić; Ann R Bradlow
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Tongue movements and their acoustic consequences in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Authors:  Yana Yunusova; Jordan R Green; Lauren Greenwood; Jun Wang; Gary L Pattee; Lorne Zinman
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 0.849

6.  Vowel acoustics in Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis: comparison of clear, loud, and slow speaking conditions.

Authors:  Kris Tjaden; Jennifer Lam; Greg Wilding
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 2.297

7.  Clear Speech Variants: An Acoustic Study in Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Jennifer Lam; Kris Tjaden
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Perception of speech reflects optimal use of probabilistic speech cues.

Authors:  Meghan Clayards; Michael K Tanenhaus; Richard N Aslin; Robert A Jacobs
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-06-25

9.  Vowel-related tongue movements in speech: straight or curved paths? (L).

Authors:  Anders Löfqvist
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 10.  Timing in talking: what is it used for, and how is it controlled?

Authors:  Alice Turk; Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 6.237

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.