DOCSLIB.ORG

Dealing with Dysarthria and CAS CASANA Webinar October, 2013 Ruth Stoeckel, Ph.D., CCC-SLP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dealing with Dysarthria and CAS CASANA Webinar October, 2013 Ruth Stoeckel, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Dealing with Dysarthria and CAS CASANA webinar October, 2013 Ruth Stoeckel, Ph.D., CCC-SLP Disclosures Nonfinancial: CASANA Professional Advisory Board Financial: CASANA DVD and speaker fees Objectives of this course: 1. Identify characteristics that help to differentiate impairment in motor execution from motor planning/programming 2. Explain how speech subsystems can be affected in children with dysarthria 3. Demonstrate knowledge of how principles of motor learning inform decision‐making in treatment for dysarthria Introduction There are interactions among cognitive, language, and speech development (Nip, Green & Marx, 2010) We need to discern the relative contribution of various factors in children with communication disorders Today, discussion will center on identification and treatment of an impairment in motor execution (dysarthria) when it occurs in conjunction with an impairment of motor planning and programming (Childhood Apraxia of Speech) Diagnosis can be challenging: Speech sound disorders do not occur in isolation Phonologic Disorder The primary factor is thought to be linguistic rather than motor Etiology is most often unknown Childhood Apraxia of Speech The primary factor is thought to be praxis: planning/programming movements No obvious weakness or impaired ability to move articulators Can be acquired (e.g., stroke, TBI) or “developmental” Dysarthria(s) Difficulty with execution of movements Weakness, paralysis, or abnormal tone resulting in decreased range of motion, decreased speed, or impaired movement of the articulators Usually caused by impairment in the central or peripheral nervous system The term “dysarthria” may be used as a general term by some people “dys” = partial impairment of “arthria” = speaking SLPs use the term in a more specific sense • Usually differentiated by the site of neurologic damage, the observed impairment of the speech muscles, and the characteristics of speech production • Disturbances in strength, speed of movement, range of movement, and timing, which disrupt accuracy • Depending on the type of condition causing the dysarthria, one or more muscle groups may be affected, meaning difficulty with respiration, phonation, resonance, articulation and/or prosody • The nature and severity of neuromuscular dysfunction can vary across muscle groups within a child • Classifications are based on adult acquired dysarthrias • May not fully account for issues related to disruption in the system of a child who is still developing speech and language skills Differential Diagnosis There is no published test that is adequate to give a definitive diagnosis of dysarthria (McCauley & Strand, 2008) Assessment procedures are used to • determine the relative contribution of linguistic/phonologic and/or motor impairments • assist in planning treatment • “A significant research challenge is to determine the diagnostic boundaries between CAS and some types of dysarthria with which it may share several speech, prosody, and voice features.” ASHA Technical Report, 2007 History • Birth history • Family history • Developmental milestones • First words,word combinations • Motor milestones • Co‐existing problems • Sensory function issues • Seizures, hearing loss, learning issues • Feeding history, abnormal reflexes • Dysarthria and CAS can be either congenital or acquired • Dysarthria is often a part of a more general motor disorder, e.g., cerebral palsy or genetic disorders • Clumsiness • Oral hypo‐ or hypersensitivity • With dysarthria, muscle control is generally disrupted for both nonspeech (swallowing, chewing, blowing, etc.) and speech movements • With CAS, there may have no problem or there may be different difficulties with nonverbal oral‐motor skills (e.g., overstuffing vs trouble swallowing) Structural‐Functional Examination These are subjective observations • Structures • Function of each structure • Range of motion • Coordination • Strength • Ability to vary muscular tension • Speed • Muscle tone refers to the degree of muscle contraction or tension at rest • Damage to upper motor neuron system is usually related to spasticity, lower motor neuron system to hypotonia • It is not the same as weakness, although a child with low tone may be weak • Hypotonia may be seen in structures at rest, but does not always affect movement • Muscle weakness occurs when not enough muscle fibers are contracting. May be due to • Too few fibers available (muscle atrophy) • Disruption of the pathway so the muscle fibers are not activated • Inadequate levels of activation • Ability to vary muscular tension • Very little strength required • Needed for precise differentiation of sounds within a sequence (e.g. “man” vs”pan”) Observations of Physiologic Functioning Observed in spontaneous output and as part of the motor speech exam • Respiration • Articulation • Phonation • Resonance • Prosody Possible Impairments in Dysarthria (adapted from Hodge & Wellman, 1999) Respiration Muscles of rib cage, diaphragm, and abdomen Reduced loudness; poor regulation of loudness Reduced breath group length Inhalation poorly coordinated with speech (speech initiated at end of inhalation; inhalation within words) Difficulty initiating phonation Articulation Lips, tongue, jaw Imprecise (“mushy”) production of consonants Reduced vowel space, vowel distortions Slow initiation and slow rate of articulator movements Inability to move articulators independently (e.g., jaw vs tongue after age 4-5) Involuntary movements of muscles of articulation Phonation Laryngeal muscles interacting with airstream from lungs under control of muscles of respiration Difficulty initiating phonation Inappropriate pitch (too high or low) Reduced range of pitch and/or loudness Voice quality deviations (breathy, strained, hoarse) Involuntary “extra” phonation Resonance Muscles of soft palate, pharyngeal walls, tongue and mandible Nasal emission on pressure consonants Hyper- or hyponasal resonance Reduced breath group length Articulatory error patterns: nasal additions, weak pressure consonants, nasal assimilation, voicing errors Prosody Muscles of respiration, phonation, resonance, articulation Difficulty regulating pitch, duration, or loudness for lexical or phrasal stress Poorly regulated breath groups Articulation: Speech Sound Inventory • Phonetic Inventory (Independent analysis) • What sounds is the child producing spontaneously? • What types of errors? Consistent? • Error Inventory (Relational analysis) • How does the child’s sound system map onto adult forms? Distortions? Articulation: Speech Motor Skills • Observations regarding • Precision and consistency of movements • Ability to vary rate and/or loudness • Slower rate may improve accuracy for both CAS and dysarthria • Ability to vary muscular tension • Accuracy with increasing length or phonetic complexity of utterances Phonation • Difficulty initiating phonation (also in CAS) • Difficulty controlling loudness (also in CAS) • Reduced loudness/breathy voice • Reduced pitch or loudness range Resonance • Hypernasal resonance (also in CAS, possibly due to timing) • Hyponasal resonance • Nasal emission or nasal assimilation Prosody • Reduced pitch/loudness range • Poor regulation of breath support for lexical or phrasal stress (expressiveness) Comparison of Childhood Apraxia of Speech, Dysarthria and Severe Phonological Disorder Verbal Apraxia Dysarthria Severe Phonological Disorder No weakness, incoordination or paralysis Decreased strength and coordination of No weakness, incoordination or paralysis of speech musculature speech musculature that leads to of speech musculature imprecise speech production, slurring and distortions No difficulty with involuntary motor Difficulty with involuntary motor control No difficulty with involuntary motor control for chewing, swallowing, etc. for chewing, swallowing, etc. due to control for chewing and swallowing unless there is also an oral apraxia muscle weakness and incoordination Inconsistencies in articulation performance‐‐the same word may be Articulation may be noticeably "different" Consistent errors that can usually be produced several different ways due to imprecision, but errors generally grouped into categories (fronting, consistent stopping, etc.) Errors include substitutions, omissions, Errors are generally distortions Errors may include substitutions, additions and repetitions, frequently omissions, distortions, etc. Omissions in includes simplification of word forms. final position more likely than initial Tendency for omissions in initial position. position. Vowel distortions not as Tendency to centralize vowels to a common. "schwaa" Number of errors increases as length of May be less precise in connected speech Errors are generally consistent as length of word/phrase increases than in single words words/phrases increases Well rehearsed, "automatic" speech is No difference in how easily speech is No difference in how easily speech is easiest to produce, "on demand" speech produced based on situation produced based on situation most difficult Receptive language skills are usually Typically no significant discrepancy Sometimes differences between receptive significantly better than expressive skills between receptive and expressive and expressive language skills language skills Rate, rhythm and stress of speech are Rate, rhythm and stress are disrupted in Typically no disruption of rate, rhythm or disrupted, some groping for placement ways specifically related to the type of stress may be noted dysarthria (spastic, flaccid, etc.) Generally good
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Presenting with Dynamic Aphasia 407
    J7ournal ofNeurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 1996;60:403-410 403 Progressive supranuclear palsy presenting with J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.60.4.403 on 1 April 1996. Downloaded from dynamic aphasia Thomas Esmonde, Elaine Giles, John Xuereb, John Hodges Abstract have been noted in some patients with PSP Background-Progressive supranuclear during the course of their illness,2-6 descrip- palsy (PSP) is an akinetic-rigid syndrome tions of a presentation with a disorder of spo- of unknown aetiology which usually pre- ken language production are virtually absent sents with a combination of unsteadiness, from the medical literature; Perkin et al8 bradykinesia, and disordered eye move- reported five patients with atypical presenta- ment. Speech often becomes dysarthric tions, two of whom had severe dysphasia in but language disorders are not well recog- the context of mild global dementia, one made nised. naming errors and later developed unintelligi- Methods-Three patients with PSP ble speech, and the other was described as a (pathologically confirmed in two) are non-fluent dysphasic. The lack of awareness of reported in which the presenting symp- this aspect is illustrated by the fact that two toms were those of difficulty with lan- recent books devoted entirely to PSP,9 10 guage output. although mentioning mild word finding diffi- Results-Neuropsychological testing culty and reduction in speech output during showed considerable impairment on a the course of the disease, do not refer to this range of single word tasks which require presenting feature. We have seen three active initiation and search strategies patients with PSP in whom the initial presen- (letter and category fluency, sentence tation was one of a verbal adynamia, resem- completion), and on tests of narrative bling the phenomenon described by Luria," language production.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Segments
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Queen Mary Research Online Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 2014, 0 , 1 – 12 . doi:10.1017/S0272263114000138 BEYOND SEGMENTS Prosody in SLA QA Ineke Mennen Bangor University Esther de Leeuw AQ1 Queen Mary , University of London Mastering the pronunciation of a second language (L2) is considered extremely diffi cult, and few individuals succeed in sounding like a native speaker when learning a L2 in adulthood (Bongaerts, Van Summeren, Planken, & Schils, 1997 ; Scovel, 2000 ). Successful L2 pronunciation involves not only learning how to authentically produce all the indi- vidual sounds of the target language but also the acquisition of the L2’s unique prosody, such as its intonation, stress, rhythm, tone, and tempo. Transfer from the fi rst language (L1) is thought to be particularly persistent in prosody; L1 prosodic infl uences can remain present even after years of experience with the L2 (Mennen, 2004 ; Pickering, 2004 ). Research suggests that nontargetlike prosody in a L2 plays an important and independent role in the perception of foreign accentedness and in native-listener judgments of comprehensibility (Jilka, 2000 ; Magen, 1998 ; Munro, 1995 ; Trofi movich & Baker, 2006 ). Some research even suggests that prosody is more important than segments in such perceptions The idea of putting together this special issue originated during a workshop on L2 prosody at Bangor University organized by the fi rst author. We would like to thank all participants of that workshop for the enthusiasm with which this idea was received. We wish to express our sincere thanks to all of the authors for their excellent contributions to this issue and to the SSLA editorial team for all their help in bringing this issue to completion.
    [Show full text]
  • Pearls & Oy-Sters: Paroxysmal Dysarthria-Ataxia Syndrome
    RESIDENT & FELLOW SECTION Pearls & Oy-sters: Paroxysmal dysarthria-ataxia syndrome Acoustic analysis in a case of antiphospholipid syndrome Annalisa Gessani, BSpPath,* Francesco Cavallieri, MD,* Carla Budriesi, BSpPath, Elisabetta Zucchi, MD, Correspondence Marcella Malagoli, MD, Sara Contardi, MD, Maria Teresa Mascia, MD, PhD, Giada Giovannini, MD, and Dr. Giovannini Jessica Mandrioli, MD [email protected] Neurology® 2019;92:e2727-e2731. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000007619 MORE ONLINE Pearls Video c Paroxysmal dysarthria-ataxia syndrome (PDA), first described by Parker in 1946, is characterized by paroxysmal and stereotyped repeated daily episodes of sudden ataxic symptoms associated with dysarthric speech lasting from few seconds to minutes.1 During the episodes, patients present with slow speech, irregular articulatory breakdown, dysprosodia, hypernasality, variable pitch and loudness, and prolonged intervals, consistent with perceptual characteristics of ataxic dysarthria.2,3 2 c PDA is a rare neurologic manifestation of either genetic or acquired conditions. The most frequent genetic diseases occurring with PDA are episodic ataxias, a group of dominantly inherited disorders characterized by transient and recurrent episodes of truncal instability and limbs incoordination triggered by exertion or emotional stress.4 Among acquired conditions, PDA has been reported mainly in multiple sclerosis (MS), in other – immunomediated diseases, or in ischemic stroke.5 7 The common finding among these diseases is the involvement of cerebellar pathways, specifically the crossed fibers of cerebello-thalamocortical pathway in the lower midbrain. Indeed, most of the reported cases of PDA suggest that the responsible lesion is located in the midbrain, near or in the red nucleus,8 where a lesion frequently reveals with dysarthria.9,10 Oy-sters c Until now, the pathophysiologic basis of PDA remains unknown, as well as the charac- terization of dysarthria during PDA.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Speech Impairment in Parkinson's Disease
    Ap proof done. OK Original Article Clinical speech impairment in Parkinson’s disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, and multiple system atrophy S. Sachin, G. Shukla, V. Goyal, S. Singh, Vijay Aggarwal1, Gureshkumar2, M. Behari Departments of Neurology, 1ENT and 2Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi - 110 029, India. Context: Speech abnormalities are common to the three by abnormalities like inability to maintain loudness, Parkinsonian syndromes, namely Parkinson’s disease monotonous and harsh voice, articulation errors and [2-4] (PD), progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and multiple reduced fluency. Progressive supranuclear palsy system atrophy (MSA), the nature and severity of which is (PSP) subjects can have a harsh and strained voice of clinical interest and diagnostic value. Aim: To evaluate with frequent articulatory errors, stuttering, palilalia the clinical pattern of speech impairment in patients with and variable intensity and rate of speech along PD, PSP and MSA and to identify signiÞ cant differences on with or even outweighing the monotonous speech of [5] quantitative speech parameters when compared to controls. Parkinsonism. Speech in multiple system atrophy Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study conducted in a (MSA) is characterized by reduced loudness, variable tertiary medical teaching institute. Materials and Methods: rate and loudness, imprecise consonants, reduced stress, Twenty-two patients with PD, 18 patients with PSP and 20 mono-pitch, voice strain and harshness in varying [6] patients with MSA and 10 age-matched healthy controls combinations. The predominant type of dysarthria were recruited over a period of 1.5 years. The patients were corresponds well to the subtypes of MSA namely [3] clinically evaluated for the presence and characteristics of cerebellar (MSA-C) and Parkinsonian (MSA-P).
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Accent Syndrome in a Patient with Multiple Sclerosis
    CASE REPORT Foreign Accent Syndrome in a Patient with Multiple Sclerosis Jacqueline I Bakker, Suzanne Apeldoorn, Luanne M Metz ABSTRACT: Background: Foreign accent syndrome is a speech disorder which leads listeners to perceive the patient as having a foreign accent. It has been recognized previously after stroke, brain injury or unknown causes. Case report:A 52-year-old woman with clinically definite relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) presented with episodes of what was perceived as a Dutch accent along with other neurologic symptoms that would resolve simultaneously. She was assessed by a speech therapist both during an episode and after complete recovery. Speech and MRI changes (showing deep white matter lesions in the corpus callosum, left pariental lobe and left frontal lobe) were consistent with previous reports of foreign accent syndrome. Conclusions: This patient’s episodes of foreign accent are thought to be due to her MS. This is the first case reported of a patient with foreign accent syndrome secondary to MS. RÉSUMÉ: Syndrome de “l’accent étranger” chez une patiente atteinte de sclérose en plaques. Introduction: Le syndrome de l’accent étranger est un trouble du langage dans lequel le patient est perçu par l’entourage comme ayant un accent étranger. Cet état a déjà été observé après un accident vasculaire cérébral, un traumatisme cérébral ou sans cause connue. Observation: Une femme âgée de 52 ans, atteinte de la forme rémittente de sclérose en plaques (SEP) confirmée, a consulté pour un phénomène épisodique comprenant un trouble du langage, perçu par l’entourage comme un accent hollandais associé à d’autres symptômes neurologiques qui disparaissaient simultanément.
    [Show full text]
  • A Sub-Acute Case of Resolving Acquired Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia Shannon C
    hysical M f P ed l o ic a in n r e u & o R J International Journal of Physical l e a h n a o b i Mauszycki et al., Int J Phys Med Rehabil 2014, 2:2 t i l a ISSN: 2329-9096i t a n r t i e o t n 10.4172/2329-9096.1000188 n I Medicine & Rehabilitation DOI: Research Article Open Access A Sub-Acute Case of Resolving Acquired Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia Shannon C. Mauszycki1,2*, Sandra Wright1 and Julie L. Wambaugh1,2 ¹VA Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, UT, USA ²University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA *Corresponding author: Shannon C. Mauszycki, Aphasia/Apraxia Research Lab, 151-A, Building 2, 500 Foothill Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84148, USA, Tel: 801-582-1565, Ext: 2182; Fax: 801-584-5621; E-mail: [email protected] Rec date: 20 Feb 2014; Acc date:21 March 2014; Pub date: 23 March 2014 Copyright: © 2014 Mauszycki SC, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract Apraxia of speech (AOS) is a neurogenic, motor speech disorder that disrupts the planning for speech production. However, there are only a few reports that have described the evolution of stroke-induced AOS symptoms in the acute or sub-acute phase of recovery. The purpose of this report was to provide a data-based description of an individual with sub-acute AOS and aphasia followed from 1 month post-onset a stroke to 8 months post-stroke.
    [Show full text]
  • Wokshop on Developing an International Prosodic Alphabet (Ipra) Within the AM Framework
    Wokshop on developing an International Prosodic Alphabet (IPrA) within the AM framework SunSun----AhAh JunJun, UCLA JosJosJoséJos éééIgnacio HualdeHualde, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Pilar PrietoPrieto, ICREA – Universitat Pompeu Fabra Outline 1. Introduction & the motivations for developing the IPrA (Jun, Hualde, Prieto) 2. Proposals on labels of ---Pitch accents (Prieto) ---Phrasal/Boundary tones (Jun) ---NonNon- ---f0f0 features (Hualde) Part 1 Introduction & the motivations for developing the IPrA (by Sun-Ah Jun) Transcription system of intonation and prosodic structure in AM framework • ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) is a consensus system for labelling spoken utterances to mark phonologically contrastive intonational events and prosodic structure based on the Autosegmental-Metrical model of intonational phonology (e.g., Pierrehumbert 1980, Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986, Ladd 1996/2008). • It was originally designed for English (1994), but has become a general framework for the development of prosodic annotation systems at the phonological level Various ToBI systems/AM models of intonation • Models of intonational phonology and ToBI annotation systems have been developed independently for dozens of typologically diverse languages (e.g., edited books by Jun 2005, 2014, Frota & Prieto 2015). ToBI is language-specific, not an IPA for prosody. •The ToBI system proposed for each language is assumed to be based on a well-established body of research on intonational phonology of that language. “ToBI is not an IPA for prosody. Each ToBI is specific to a language variety and the community of researchers working on the language variety” •Prosodic systems of various languages analyzed and described in the same framework allowed us to compare the systems across languages, i.e., prosodic typology Prosodic Typology • Classification of languages based on their prosody.
    [Show full text]
  • The Physical Significance of Acoustic Parameters and Its Clinical
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN The physical signifcance of acoustic parameters and its clinical signifcance of dysarthria in Parkinson’s disease Shu Yang1,2,6, Fengbo Wang3,6, Liqiong Yang4,6, Fan Xu2,6, Man Luo5, Xiaqing Chen5, Xixi Feng2* & Xianwei Zou5* Dysarthria is universal in Parkinson’s disease (PD) during disease progression; however, the quality of vocalization changes is often ignored. Furthermore, the role of changes in the acoustic parameters of phonation in PD patients remains unclear. We recruited 35 PD patients and 26 healthy controls to perform single, double, and multiple syllable tests. A logistic regression was performed to diferentiate between protective and risk factors among the acoustic parameters. The results indicated that the mean f0, max f0, min f0, jitter, duration of speech and median intensity of speaking for the PD patients were signifcantly diferent from those of the healthy controls. These results reveal some promising indicators of dysarthric symptoms consisting of acoustic parameters, and they strengthen our understanding about the signifcance of changes in phonation by PD patients, which may accelerate the discovery of novel PD biomarkers. Abbreviations PD Parkinson’s disease HKD Hypokinetic dysarthria VHI-30 Voice Handicap Index H&Y Hoehn–Yahr scale UPDRS III Unifed Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale Motor Score Parkinson’s disease (PD), a chronic, progressive neurodegenerative disorder with an unknown etiology, is asso- ciated with a signifcant burden with regards to cost and use of societal resources 1,2. More than 90% of patients with PD sufer from hypokinetic dysarthria3. Early in 1969, Darley et al. defned dysarthria as a collective term for related speech disorders.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Childhood Apraxia of Speech, Dysarthria and Severe Phonological Disorder (Some Or All of These Characteristics May Be Present
    Comparison of Childhood Apraxia of Speech, Dysarthria and Severe Phonological Disorder (Some or all of these characteristics may be present. Consult with a Speech-Language Pathologist who is experienced in the diagnosis of motor speech disorders for a definitive differential diagnosis) Verbal Apraxia Dysarthria Severe Phonological Disorder No weakness, incoordination or Decreased strength and coordination No weakness, incoordination or paralysis of speech musculature of speech musculature that leads to paralysis of speech musculature imprecise speech production, slurring and distortions No difficulty with involuntary Difficulty with involuntary motor No difficulty with involuntary motor motor control for chewing, control for chewing, swallowing, control for chewing and swallowing swallowing, etc. unless there is etc. due to muscle weakness and also an oral apraxia incoordination Inconsistencies in articulation Articulation may be noticeably Consistent errors that can usually be performance--the same word may “different” due to imprecision, but grouped into categories (fronting, be produced several different errors generally consistent stopping, etc.) ways Errors include substitutions, Errors are generally distortions Errors may include substitutions, omissions, additions and omissions, distortions, etc. Omissions repetitions, frequently includes in final position more likely than initial simplification of word forms. position. Vowel distortions not as Tendency for omissions in initial common. position. Tendency to centralize vowels to
    [Show full text]
  • Persistence of Prosody Shigeto Kawahara & Jason A
    Persistence of prosody Shigeto Kawahara & Jason A. Shaw Keio University & Yale University Preamble In October 2016, at a workshop held at the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (NINJAL),1 Junko and Armin presented a talk in which they argued against Kubozono’s (1999; 2003) proposal that VVN sequences in Japanese are syllabified as two separate syllables (V.VN) (Ito & Mester, 2016a). One of their arguments involved the consequences for VNC sequences (e.g. /beruriNkko/ ‘people from Berlin’); more specifically, Kubozono’s proposal would require positing syllables headed by a nasal (i.e. V.NC, or [be.ru.ri.Nk.ko]). They argue that syllables headed by a nasal segment are “questionable syllable types”, at least in the context of Japanese phonology. We are happy to dedicate this paper to Junko and Armin, in which we argue that Japanese has syllables headed by a fricative, and possibly those headed by an affricate. 1 Introduction Segments or prosody, which comes first? This question has been an important topic in phonetic and phonological theories. A classic view in generative phonology is that input segments are given first, and syllables and higher prosodic structures are built over segments according to universal and language-specific algorithms (Clements & Keyser 1983; Ito 1986; Kahn 1976; Steriade 1982 and subsequent research). An almost standard assumption in this line of research is that syllabification does not exist in the underlying representation (Blevins, 1995; Clements, 1986; Hayes, 1989), and this assumption reflects the view that segments come before prosody.2 However, there are also proposals to the effect that prosodic templates are given first, and segments are “filled in” later; such is the case for patterns of prosodic morphology, such as reduplication and truncation (Ito, 1990; Levin, 1985; Marantz, 1982; McCarthy, 1981; McCarthy & Prince, 1986, 1990; Mester, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Phonetic Encoding of Prosodic Structure
    Keating: Phonetic encoding of prosody PHONETIC ENCODING OF PROSODIC STRUCTURE Patricia A. Keating Dept. of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles ABSTRACT: Speech production is highly sensitive to the prosodic organization of utterances. This paper reviews some of the ways in which articulation varies according to prosodic prominences and boundaries. INTRODUCTION Prosody is the organization of speech into a hierarchy of units or domains, some of which are more prominent than others. That is, prosody serves both a grouping function and a prominence marking function in speech. Prosody includes (1) phrasing, which refers to the various size groupings of smaller domains into larger ones, such as segments into syllables, syllables into words, or words into phrases; (2) stress, which refers to prominence of syllables at the word level; (3) accent, which refers to prominence at the phrase level; and distributions of tones (pitch events) associated with any of these, such as (4) lexical tones associated with syllables; or (5) intonational tones associated with phrases or accents. These various aspects of prosody together define and reflect the prosodic structure of an utterance. For the purposes of this paper, we can consider any one interval of speech that is grouped into a single prosodic domain and ask, At what level of prosodic structure does this domain occur? What speech events occur at the beginning and end of this domain? What is in the domains before and after this one? How prominent is this domain relative to those neighbours? All of this information will be relevant phonetically. The phonetic dimensions that are most obviously involved in realizing prosody are pitch, duration, and loudness, which are generally thought of as the suprasegmental dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Find a Speech-Language Pathologist When Your Child Has Apraxia of Speech
    How to Find a Speech‐Language Pathologist When Your Child Has Apraxia of Speech Your child has been diagnosed with Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS) or is suspected of having CAS. According to the American Speech Language Hearing Association (ASHA) Position State‐ ment ) on CAS, a speech‐language pathologist (SLP) is the appro‐ priate professional to make the diagnosis of CAS and to provide treatment for this disorder. You are now on a mission to find an SLP to treat your child. Many parents wonder: How do I begin this part of the CAS journey? This brochure is intended to provide guidance in selecting an SLP. Please note that if you live outside of the United States, your therapist may have a professional title other than SLP. What Qualifications Should I Look For in an SLP? The SLP should be certified by the American Speech Language and Hearing Association (ASHA). In order to be certified, an SLP must have completed all coursework in an accredited program, have passed a national exam, and have completed a residency called a Clinical Fellowship Year (CFY). In addition, an SLP is required to participate in continuing education in order to retain the Certificate of Clinical Competence (CCC). Look for these credentials after an SLP’s name: CCC‐SLP or CFY‐SLP (an SLP currently in his/her residency). For countries other than the United States, look for clinicians who are associate members of ASHA and/or individuals who are affiliated with the professional or‐ ganization of their country. Be aware that there are different training requirements among countries.
    [Show full text]