Modeling of oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation to compensate for the acoustic effects of nasalization

Hypernasality is one of the most detrimental speech disturbances that lead to declines of speech intelligibility. Velopharyngeal inadequacy, which is associated with anatomic defects such as cleft palate or neuromuscular disorders that affect velopharygneal function, is the primary cause of hypernasality. A simulation study by Rong and Kuehn [J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 55(5), 1438–1448 (2012)] demonstrated that properly adjusted oropharyngeal articulation can reduce nasality for vowels synthesized with an articulatory model [Mermelstein, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 53(4), 1070–1082 (1973)]. In this study, a speaker-adaptive articulatory model was developed to simulate speaker-customized oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation to compensate for the acoustic effects of nasalization on /a/, /i/, and /u/. The results demonstrated that (1) the oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation effectively counteracted the effects of nasalization on the second lowest formant frequency (F2) and partially compensated for the effects of nasalization on vowel space (e.g., shifting and constriction of vowel space) and (2) the articulatory adaptation strategies generated by the speaker-adaptive model might be more efficacious for counteracting the acoustic effects of nasalization compared to the adaptation strategies generated by the standard articulatory model in Rong and Kuehn. The findings of this study indicated the potential of using oropharyngeal articulatory adaptation as a means to correct maladaptive articulatory behaviors and to reduce nasalit

Comparing methods for locating pitch 'elbows'

Contains fulltext : 221099.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ICPhS XVI, 6 augustus 200

Análise das medidas aerodinâmicas no português brasileiro por meio do Método Multiparamétrico de Avaliação Vocal Objetiva Assistida (EVA) Analysis of aerodynamic measures in Brazilian portuguese through Multiparameter Assessment Method Vocal Objective Assist (EVA)

OBJETIVO: definir medidas aerodinâmicas em falantes do português brasileiro, sem queixas vocais, obtidas pelo programa EVA. MÉTODO: participaram do estudo 20 homens e 20 mulheres, que tiveram suas vozes analisadas. RESULTADOS: os valores médios referentes à pressão subglótica para vozes femininas e masculinas foram, respectivamente: Pressão subglótica= 5,84 hPa e 6,7 hPa, média da intensidade= 79,21 dB e 81,7 dB, média do fluxo oral= 0,09 dm³/s e 0,16 dm³/s, eficiência glótica= 13,87 dB/hPa e 12,78 dB/hPa, eficiência laríngea= 188,08 dB/(hPa.dm³/s) e 97,11 dB/(hPa.dm³/s), resistência laríngea= 96,26 hPa/(dm³/s) e 52,64 hPa/(dm³/s), média da frequência fundamental (F0)= 208,28 Hz e 136,56 Hz e pico da pressão do fluxo oral= 0,093 e 0,098. Houve diferença estatisticamente significante em relação ao gênero para as medidas de média de intensidade, eficiência laríngea, resistência laríngea e média da frequência fundamental. Os valores médios referentes ao fluxo oral para vozes femininas e masculinas foram respectivamente: Pressão subglótica= 6,05 hPa e 6,6 hPa, média da intensidade= 65,50 dB e 66,3 dB, média do fluxo oral= 0,10 dm³/s e 0,13 dm³/s, eficiência glótica= 11,12 dB/hPa e 11,77 dB/hPa, eficiência laríngea= 144,83 dB/(hPa.dm³/s) e 97,89 dB/(hPa.dm³/s), resistência laríngea= 78,98 hPa/(dm³/s) e 61,81 hPa/(dm³/s), média da F0= 222,52 Hz e 139,20 Hz e pico da pressão do fluxo oral= 0,047 e 0,053. CONCLUSÃO: o EVA é um programa ainda novo no Brasil, e a análise de medidas aerodinâmicas, em falantes do português brasileiro, permite a obtenção de valores de referência, possibilitando assim comparações com estudos futuros.<br>PURPOSE: to define aerodynamic measures in Brazilian Portuguese speakers without voice complaints, obtained by the EVA program. METHOD: the study included 20 men and 20 women who had their voices analyzed. RESULTS: the mean values with subglottic pressure for female and male voices were: Subglottic pressure = 5.84 hPa and 6.7 hPa; average intensity = 79.21dB and 81.7dB; oral mean flow = 0.09 dm3/s and 0.16 dm3/s; glottic efficiency = 13.87dB/hPa and 12.78 dB/hPa; laryngeal efficiency = 188.08 dB/(hPa.dm3/s) and 97.11dB/(hPa.dm3/s); laryngeal resistance = 96.26 hPa/(dm3/s) and 52.64 hPa/(dm3/s); mean fundamental frequency (F0) = 208.28 Hz and 136.56 Hz and peak mouth pressure flow = 0.093 and 0.098. There was a statistically significant difference in relation to gender for the measures of average intensity, efficiency, larynx, laryngeal resistance and mean fundamental frequency. The average flow for the oral female and male voices were: subglottic pressure = 6.05 hPa and 6.6 hPa; average intensity = 65.50 dB and 66.3 dB; oral mean flow = 0, 10 dm3/s and 0.13 dm3/s; glottic efficiency = 11.12 dB/hPa and 11.77 dB/hPa; laryngeal efficiency = 144.83 dB/( hPa.dm3/s) and 97.89 dB/( hPa.dm3/s); laryngeal resistance = 78.98 hPa/(dm3/s) and 61.81 hPa/( dm3/s); average F0 = 222.52 Hz and 139.20 Hz and peak pressure oral flow = 0.047 and 0.053. CONCLUSION: EVA is a new program in Brazil, and analysing the aerodynamic measures in Brazilian Portuguese speakers, allows us to obtain reference values, thus allowing comparisons with future studies

Dialect typology: recent advances

This chapter provides an overview of recent innovative approaches that focus on the distributional patterns of linguistic phenomena in dialects across different languages. We set the stage by discussing a number of geographical factors that are assumed in the literature to have a bearing on the structural make-up of different languages and dialects such as world region, altitude, contact with speakers of other languages or dialects, etc. We then move on to sketch the extent to which dialects of a language exhibit common features (e.g., “vernacular universals” à la Chambers 2004) and identify structural dichotomies and continua that are regularly invoked when it comes to explaining the structural diversity of languages, namely, analyticity versus syntheticity, explicitness versus economy, complexity versus simplicity, and innovativeness versus conservativeness, all within the context of geographic space