Literature DB >> 15331104

The effects of vowels on voice perturbation measures.

Mehmet Akif Kiliç1, Fatih Oğüt, Gürsel Dursun, Erdoğan Okur, Ilhami Yildirim, Raşit Midilli.   

Abstract

This study examines voice perturbation parameters of the sustained [a] in English and of the eight vowels in Turkish to discover whether any difference exists between these languages, and whether a correlation exists between voice perturbation parameters and articulatory and acoustic properties of the Turkish vowels. Eight Turkish vowels uttered by 26 healthy nonsmoker volunteer males who are native Turkish speakers were compared with a voice database that includes samples of normal and disordered voices belonging to American English speakers. Fundamental frequencies, the first and second formants, and perturbation parameters, such as jitter percent, pitch perturbation quotient, shimmer percent, and amplitude perturbation quotient of the sustained vowels, were measured. Also, the first and second formants of the sustained [a] in English were measured, and other parameters have been obtained from the database. When the voice perturbation parameters in Turkish and English were compared, statistically significant differences were not found. However, when Turkish vowels compared with each other, statistically significant differences were found among perturbation values. Categorical comparisons of the Turkish vowels like high-low, rounded-unrounded, and front-back revealed significant differences in perturbation values. In correlation analysis, a weak linear inverse relation between jitter percent and the first formant (r=-0.260, p<0.05) was found.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15331104     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2003.09.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Voice        ISSN: 0892-1997            Impact factor:   2.009


  6 in total

1.  Vowel selection and its effects on perturbation and nonlinear dynamic measures.

Authors:  Julia K Maccallum; Yu Zhang; Jack J Jiang
Journal:  Folia Phoniatr Logop       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 0.849

2.  Histopathological effects of estrogen deficiency on larynx mucosa in ovariectomised rats.

Authors:  Mehmet Surmeli; Tulay Erden Habesoglu; Mehmet Habesoglu; Ildem Deveci; Murat Eriman; Vefa Kinis; Pembegul Gunes; Erol Egeli
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-07-18       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Acoustic Perturbation Measures Improve with Increasing Vocal Intensity in Individuals With and Without Voice Disorders.

Authors:  M Brockmann-Bauser; J E Bohlender; D D Mehta
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 2.009

4.  Assessment of Effects of Septoplasty on Acoustic Parameters of Voice: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Authors:  Yakup Yeğin; Mustafa Çelik; Baver Maşallah Şimşek; Ayşe Öznur Akidil; Burak Olgun; Ahmet Altıntaş; Fatma Tülin Kayhan
Journal:  Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-12-01

5.  Acoustic voice characteristics with and without wearing a facemask.

Authors:  Duy Duong Nguyen; Patricia McCabe; Donna Thomas; Alison Purcell; Maree Doble; Daniel Novakovic; Antonia Chacon; Catherine Madill
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Cepstral Analysis of Voice in Patients With Thyroidectomy.

Authors:  Yu Jeong Shin; Ki Hwan Hong
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 3.372

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.