| Literature DB >> 31739652 |
Yong Tae Hong1, Phan Huu Ngoc Minh2, Ki Hwan Hong1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Both acoustic and aerodynamic analyses are essential to evaluate the phonetic characteristics of voice pathology. The purpose of the study is to determine the magnitude of their correlation with the different types of bilabial plosive consonants.Entities:
Keywords: Acoustics; Aerodynamics; Consonant
Year: 2019 PMID: 31739652 PMCID: PMC7248608 DOI: 10.21053/ceo.2019.01039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1976-8710 Impact factor: 3.372
Fig. 1.Wideband spectrographic characteristics of voiceless plosive consonants /pi/ and /phi/. VOT, voice onset time; VD, vowel duration; CD, closure duration.
Fig. 2.High-speed images for the glottal widths at the time of production of voiceless plosive consonants /pi/, /phi/, and /p’i/.
Statistical values of acoustic parameters for the vowel /a/ (vocal fold paralysis, n=35)
| Variable | Mean±SD (range) |
|---|---|
| Jitter (%) | 3.736±5.346 (0.541–32.591) |
| Shimmer (%) | 5.198±5.141 (1.645–24.599) |
| HNR (dB) | 0.157±0.132 (0.067–0.825) |
SD, standard deviation; HNR, harmonics-to-noise ratio.
Mean values of aerodynamic parameters for the bilabial stop consonant /pi/, /phi/, and /p’i/ (vocal fold paralysis, n=35)
| Variable | /pi/ | /phi/ | /p’i/ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flow rate (l/sec) | 0.753±0.398 | 0.969±0.545 | 0.500±0.333 |
| Airflow rate (l/sec) | 0.198±0.159 | 0.252±0.187 | 0.086±0.076 |
| SPL (dB) | 52.842±2.915 | 54.102±3.643 | 53.022±4.295 |
| Air pressure (cmH2O) | 3.189±1.448 | 3.882±1.690 | 3.498±1.629 |
| Power (W) | 0.164±0.583 | 0.104±0.101 | 0.031±0.033 |
| Efficiency (ppm) | 1.063±1.167 | 0.659±0.422 | 4.157±7.838 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
SPL, sound pressure level.
Correlation between the acoustic parameters and aerodynamic measurements of bilabial stop consonant /pi/,/phi/, and /p’i/ (vocal fold paralysis, n=35)
| Variable | /pi/ | /phi/ | /p’i/ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jitter | Shimmer | HNR | Jitter | Shimmer | HNR | Jitter | Shimmer | HNR | |
| MFR (l/sec) | 0.368* | 0.357* | 0.512** | 0.452** | 0.501** | 0.451** | 0.490** | 0.477** | |
| MAR (l/sec) | 0.592** | 0.578** | 0.573** | 0.344* | |||||
| MS (dB) | 0.439** | 0.415* | 0.453* | 0.519** | 0.466* | 0.505* | |||
| MAP (cmH2O) | 0.340* | 0.414* | 0.429* | 0.466** | |||||
| MP (W) | 0.716** | 0.669** | 0.711** | 0.516** | 0.503** | 0.520** | |||
| ME (ppm) | |||||||||
HNR, harmonics-to-noise ratio; MFR, maximum flow rate; MAR, mean airflow rate; MS, mean sound pressure level; MAP, mean air pressure; MP, mean power; ME, mean efficiency.
Correlations with statistical significance are indicated by *P<0.05, **P<0.01.
Fig. 3.Distributions of correlation values between acoustic and aerodynamic parameters according to the type of plosive consonants. MFR, maximum flow rate; MAR, mean airflow rate; MS, mean sound pressure level; MAP, mean air pressure; MP, mean power; HNR, harmonics-to-noise ratio.