Discourse repetition and phonetic reduction in a person with dysarthria secondary to Parkinson’s disease
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/jircd.27138Keywords:
dysarthria, intelligibility, interactional phonetics, discourse repetitionAbstract
Background: A common concern for persons with dysarthria is a difficulty in being understood. This is captured clinically using assessments of intelligibility. Any attempt to measure intelligibility must be carried out in a way that is sensitive to the phonetic variation that occurs in naturally occurring conversational speech. This article identifies examples of an interactional event known to trigger phonetic variability: discourse repetition.
Method: This article is a case study of a 68-year-old male with dysarthria secondary to Parkinson’s disease. The method of analysis is interactional phonetics.
Results: Examples of discourse repetition are presented with accompanying interactional and phonetic analysis. The speaker is seen to produce the same linguistic tokens with varying phonetic features. In some cases, this variation means the tokens are realized as markedly different phonetic forms.
Discussion: The results highlight how variable a single speaker’s realizations of the same word can be within a single conversation. Given this, it is proposed that intelligibility is best conceptualized as a range rather than as a single, invariant score.
References
Bloch, S., and Wilkinson, R. (2004). The understandability of AAC: A conversation analysis study of acquired dysarthria. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20(4), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610400005614
Boersma, P., and Weenink, D. (2023). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.3.18. Retrieved 8 October 2023 from http://www.praat.org
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612886
Couper-Kuhlen, E., and Ford, C. E. (2004). Sound patterns in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62
Coupland, N. (1984). Accommodation at work: Some phonological data and their implications. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 46, 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1984.46.49
Curl, T. (2005). Practices in other-initiated repair resolution: The phonetic differentiation of ‘repetitions.’ Discourse Processes, 39(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3901_1
Curl, T., Local, J., and Walker, G. (2006). Repetition and the prosody–pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(10), 1721–1751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.02.008
Darley, F. L., Aronson, A. E., and Brown, J. R. (1969). Differential diagnosis patterns of dysarthria. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 12(2), 246–269. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1202.246
Duffy, J. R. (2012). Motor speech disorders: Substrates, differential diagnosis and management (3rd ed.). St. Louis: Elsevier Mosby.
Enderby, P., and Palmer, R. (2007). Frenchay Dysarthria Assessment (2nd ed.). Texas: Proed.
Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Hodge, M., and Whitehill, T. (2010). Intelligibility impairments. In J. S. Damico, M. J. Ball, and N. Müller (Eds.), Handbook of language and speech disorders (pp. 99–114). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318975.ch4
Hustad, K., and Beukelman, D. (2002). Listener comprehension of severely dysarthric speech: Effects of linguistic cues and stimulus cohesion. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 45(3), 545–558. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2002/043)
International Phonetic Association (1999). Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511807954
Johnson, K. (2004). Massive reduction in conversational American English. In K. Yoneyama and K. Maekawa (Eds.), Spontaneous speech: Data and analysis (pp. 29–54). Proceedings of the 1st Session of the 10th International Symposium, Tokyo, Japan. Tokyo: National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics.
Kent, R. D. (1996). Hearing and believing: Some limits to the auditory-perceptual assessment of speech and voice disorders. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 5(3), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360.0503.07
Kent, R. D., and Kim, Y.-J. (2003). Toward an acoustic typology of motor speech disorders. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 17(6), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269920031000086248
Kohler, K. J. (1990). Segmental reduction in connected speech in German: Phonological facts and phonetic explanations. In W. J. Hardcastle and A. Marchal (Eds.), Speech production and speech modelling (pp. 69–92). Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2037-8_4
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Leuschel, A., and Docherty, G. J. (1996). Prosodic assessment of dysarthria. In D. A. Robin, K. M. Yorkston, and D. R. Beukelman (Eds.), Disorders of motor speech: Assessment, treatment, and clinical characterization (pp. 155–178). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
Lindblom, B. (1990). Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. In W. J. Hardcastle and A. Marchal (Eds.), Speech production and speech modelling (pp. 390–403). Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2037-8_16
Liss, J. (2007). The role of speech perception in motor speech disorders. In G. Weismer (Ed.), Motor speech disorders: Essays for Ray Kent (pp. 187–219). San Diego: Plural Publishing.
Local, J. (1996). Conversational phonetics: Some aspects of news receipts in everyday talk. In E. Couper-Kuhlen and M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in conversation (pp. 177–230). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.007
Local, J. K. (2003). Variable domains and variable relevance: Interpreting phonetic exponents. Journal of Phonetics, 31(3–4), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-4470(03)00045-7
Miller, N. (2013). Measuring up to speech intelligibility. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 48(6), 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12061
Ogden, R. (2001). Turn transition, creak and glottal stop in Finnish talk-in-interaction. Journal of the International Phonetics Association, 31(1), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025100301001116
Pennington, L., Parker, N., Kelly, H., and Miller, N. (2016). Speech therapy for children with dysarthria acquired before three years of age. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 7. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006937.pub3
Plug, L. (2011). Phonetic reduction and informational redundancy in self-initiated self-repair in Dutch. Journal of Phonetics, 39(3), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.001
Rutter, B. (2009). Repair sequences in dysarthric conversational speech: A study in interactional phonetics. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 23(12), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699200903062303
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243; https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010
Schegloff, E. A. (2002). When ‘others’ initiate repair. Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 205–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.2.205
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson. G., and Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organisation of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/413107; https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041
Smiljanic, R., and Bradlow, A. R. (2005). Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 1677–1688. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2000788
Stoddart, J., Upton, C., and Widdowson, J. D.A. (1999). Sheffield dialect in the 1990s: Revisiting the concept of NORMs. In P. Foulkes, and G. J. Docherty (Eds.), Urban voices: Accent studies in the British Isles (pp. 72–89). London: Arnold.
Utianski, R., Lansford, K., Liss, J., and Azuma, T. (2011). The effects of topic knowledge on intelligibility and lexical segmentation in hypokinetic and ataxic dysarthria. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 112, 3022–3030. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1515793
Weismer, G. (2008). Speech intelligibility. In M. J. Ball, M. Perkins, N. Müller, and S. Howard (Eds.), The handbook of clinical linguistics (pp. 568–582). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444301007.ch35
Whitehill, T. L. (2002). Assessing intelligibility in speakers with cleft palate: A critical review of the literature. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 39(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_2002_039_0050_aiiswc_2.0.co_2
Yorkston, K. M., and Beukelman, D. R. (1981). Assessment of intelligibility of dysarthric speech. Tygard: C.C. Publications.
Yorkston, K., Strand, E., and Kennedy, M. (1996). Comprehensibility of dysarthric speech: Implications for assessment and treatment planning. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 5(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360.0501.55
Yorkston, K. M., Beukelman, D. R., and Bell, K. R. (1999). Management of motor speech disorders in children and adults. Austin: Pro-Ed, Inc.
