پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 922 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,606 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,333,132 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,765,855 |
تأثیر جراحی کاشت حلزون زودهنگام بر مشخصه‌های آکوستیک واکه‌های تولیدی کودکان ناشنوای کاشت‌حلزون‌شده فارسی‌زبان | ||
| زبان پژوهی | ||
| مقاله 7، دوره 12، شماره 36، آذر 1399، صفحه 139-163 اصل مقاله (597.54 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jlr.2020.26453.1711 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| سیده زهرا اصغری* 1؛ فاطمه نعمتی2؛ رضوان اکبری منیع3 | ||
| 1دکترای تخصصی زبان‌شناسی، استادیار گروه زبان، دانشکده پزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی همدان | ||
| 2دکترای تخصصی زبان‌شناسی، استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه خلیج فارس (بوشهر) | ||
| 3دکترای تخصصی گفتاردرمانی، استادیار گروه گفتاردرمانی، دانشکده توانبخشی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی همدان | ||
| چکیده | ||
| فراگوییِ درستِ واکه‌ها، از عواملِ مهم ارتباطِ کلامی موفق است و مشخصات موجِ صوتی، به بهترین وجه نحوه فراگویی را نشان می‌دهد. این بررسی، به تأثیر زمانِ جراحیِ کاشتِ حلزون، بر نخستین و دومین سازة واکه‌های فارسی و فضای واکه‌ای در تولید کودکان ناشنوای کاشت حلزون (کودکان کاشت) می‌پردازد. سازة اول و دومِ واکه‌های فارسی، در تولید کودکانِ کاشتِ پیش و پس از سه سالگی و گروه کنترلِ شنوای هم‌سن، استخراج گشته و با هم مقایسه شدند. برای مقایسة گروه‌ها، از آزمون کراسکال-والیس با سطح معناداری 05/0 استفاده شد. تفاوت معناداری میانِ گروه‌ها در سازه اول و دوم واکه‌ها، به استثنای هر دو سازه /a/ و سازه دوم /i/ و /e/ دیده شد. بر پایة آزمون‌های تعقیبی من‌ویتنی، کودکان شنوا و کاشت پیش از سه سال، تفاوت معناداری در سازه اول/i/ ، /e/ و /u/ و سازه اول و دوم /o/ و /ɑ/ داشتند. کودکان شنوا و کاشت پس از سه سال تفاوت معناداری در هشت مورد اولیه نشان دادند. کودکان کاشت پیش و پس از سه سال نیز در سازه اول /i/ و /e/ و دوم /u/ و /o/ تفاوت آماری معناداری داشتند. فراوانیِ سازه اول کودکان کاشت بیشتر از شنوایان بود؛ به این معنا که آن‌ها واکه‌ها را افتاده‌تر تولید کردند که احتمال دارد به دلیل آموزش با دهان باز مربیان برای مشاهده‌پذیری جایگاه تولید باشد. هر چند فراوانی سازه دوم آن‌ها تأییدکنندة تأثیر مطلوب جراحی زودهنگام بر شناسایی محل تولید واکه بود. زیرا اگرچه همة کودکان کاشت واکه‌های پسین را جلوتر از محل طبیعی تولید کردند، اما این ویژگی در کودکان کاشت پس از سه سالگی آشکارتر بود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| واکه‌های فارسی؛ فضای واکه‌ای؛ کاشت حلزون؛ سن کاشت؛ سازه | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The effect of cochlear implantation on the acoustic features of Farsi vowels by hearing-impaired children | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Seyedeh Zahra Asghari1؛ Fatemeh Nemati2؛ Rezvan Akbari Mani3 | ||
| 1PhD in Linguistics, Assistant Professor, Department of Language, School of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences | ||
| 2PhD in Linguistics, Assistant Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Persian Gulf University (Bushehr) | ||
| 3PhD in Speech Therapy, Assistant Professor of Speech Therapy, School of Rehabilitation, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Cochlear implantation (CI) is a preferred treatment for severe-to-profound sensory neural hearing loss and has caused significant improvement in the language ability of cochlear implantees compared to the hearing aided patients. Although CI users have gained access to auditory feedback, there are still some gaps in their speech articulation compared to the normal hearings. One area in which the difference lies is their shortcomings in the accurate production of speech segments. They evidence difficulties in the production of vowels which are determinant factors in speech intelligibility and successful communication. As studying vowels from an articulatory perspective does not provide objective results, researchers have shown an inclination for acoustic studies to investigate the differentiating features, namely the first and second formants (F1 and F2) of the vowels articulated by CI speakers. The first formant (F1) correlates with the articulatory height of vowels (high/low dimension) and the second formant (F2) corresponds to the tongue position (the front/back dimension). F1/F2 ratio yields vowel space which provides both an objective representation of the vowel articulation accuracy and the main acoustic cue in auditory perception for listeners. The studies on the acoustic features of the vowels have demonstrated indefinite and contrasting results in the comparative investigations of CI users and normal hearing listeners. Some have reported a significantly reduced vowel space for CI users, while other studies have evidenced an increase in the vowel space of CI users due to the positive impact of CI. There are even studies that have claimed an improvement in the vowel spaces of CI users to the point of similarity with the normal hearing. Inconsistent findings seem to be due to methodological differences and considering different variables such as post- or pre-lingual deafness, CI adults or children, age at implantation and time elapsed after the surgery. Among these factors, age at implantation has wide-ranging consequences and requires more in-depth studies. This study aims at investigating the effect of early cochlear implantation on the first and second formants (F1 and F2) of the Persian vowels produced by CI children. To this end, the vowel production of two groups of children, implanted before and after age three (CI<3, CI>3) with at least three years of device use length was studied. All CIs had been diagnosed with severe congenital hearing loss at both ears without any other disability and physical condition. There was a control group of five normal hearing age-matched children (NH group). After a speech therapist, each participant repeated CV syllables made up of one of the eight Persian plosives as onset and one of the six Persian vowels as nucleus. Using Praat software, the frequency of the first and the second formants of the vowels produced by children in three groups were extracted and then compared with each other. To find between-group variances, Kruskal-Wallis test was used with the significance level set at 0.05. Findings of this study demonstrated that there were significant differences among the groups in the frequency of the first and second formants of all Persian vowels except for F1 and F2 of /a/ and F2 of /i/ and /e/ (eight cases). Mann–Whitney U test showed that CI3 and normal hearing groups demonstrated significant differences in the first mentioned eight cases (F1 of /i/ and /e/ and F1 and F2 of /u/, /o/ and /ɑ/). CI3 groups were statistically different from each other in F1 of the vowels /i/ and /e/ and F2 of vowels /u/ and /o/. Considering the first formant, we did not find any association between early implantation and F1 of the vowels by CIs. All CI users produced vowels with a more open mouth than the normal hearing which seems to be due to the exaggerated training method of therapists producing the vowels with more open mouth to give a visual cue to CIs about the articulation of vowels. In terms of F2, on the contrary, there is a clear relationship between age at implantation and vowel production. Although all CIs showed lower F2 than NHs and articulated back vowels more front than their normal place, the deviation was more observable in CI children who had undergone surgery after the age 3 (CI>3). This indicates that early implantation positively affects the cochlear implanted ones in articulating vowels with normal-like F2 as an important distinguishing acoustic feature of vowels. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Persian Vowels, Vowel Space, Cochlear Implantation, Implantation Age, Formant | ||
|
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
|
||
| مراجع | ||
|
شیخ سنگ تجن، شهین و محمود بی‌جن‌خان، (1392). «بررسی ماهیت صوت‌شناختی واکه‌های فارسی در هجاهای CV گفتار اظهاری». زبان‌پژوهی. دورة 4. شمارة 8 . صص116-97. References
Baudonck, N., D'haeseleer, E., Dhooge, I., Van Lierde, K. (2011). Objective vocal quality in children using cochlear implants: a multiparameter approach. Journal of Voice, 25(6), 683-691.
Baudonck, N., Van Lierde, K., Dhooge, I., Corthals, P. (2011). A comparison of vowel productions in prelingually deaf children using cochlear implants, severe hearing-impaired children using conventional hearing aids and normal-hearing children. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 63(3), 154-160.
Boersma, P., & Van Heuven, V. (2015). Praat software (version 06.08). Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
Brian, S., Gandolfi, M., Lai, E., Reilly, E., Singe, L., Kim, A.H. (2015). The Impact of Age on Cochlear Implant Performance. International Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, 4, 329-337.
Connor, C.M., Craig, H.K., Raudenbush, S.W., Heavner, K., & Zwolan, T.A. (2006). The age at which young deaf children receive cochlear implants and their vocabulary and speech-production growth: is there an added value for early implantation? Ear and Hearing, 27(6), 628-44.
De Souza, L.B.R., Bevilacqua, M.C., Brasolotto, A.G., & Coelho, A.C. (2012). Cochlear implanted children present vocal parameters within normal standards. International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 76(8), 1180-1183.
Ertmer, D.J., Goffman, L A. (2011). Speech Production Accuracy and Variability in Young CochlearImplant Recipients: Comparisons with typically developing age-peers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54(1), 177-189.
Geers, A. (2004). Speech, language, and reading skills after early cochlear implantation. Arch Otolaryngology Head Neck Surg, 130(5), 634 -8.
Geers, A., Nicholas, J., & Sedey, A. (2003). Language skills of children with early cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing, 24(1), 46S–58S.
Geers, A., Tobey, E., Moog, J., & Brenner, C. (2008). Long-term outcomes of cochlear implantation in the preschool years: from elementary grades to high school. International Journal of Audiology, 47(2), S21–S30.
Jafari, N., Drinnan, M., Mohamadi, R., Yadegari, F., Nourbakhsh, M., & Torabinezhad, F. (2016). A comparison of Persian vowel production in hearing-impaired children using a cochlear implant and normal-hearing children. Journal of Voice, 30(3), 340-4.
Jafari, N., Yadegari, F., & Jalaie, S. (2016). Acoustic analysis of Persian vowels in cochlear implant users: a comparison with hearing-impaired children using hearing aid and normal-hearing children. Journal of Voice, 30(6), 763.e1-763.e7.
Harnsberger, J.D., Svirsky, M. A., Kaiser, A. R., Pisoni, D. B., Wright, R., & Meyer, T.A. (2001). Perceptual “vowel spaces” of cochlear implant users: Implications for the study of auditory adaptation to spectral shift. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109(5 Pt 1), 2135–2145.
Hocevar-Boltezar, I., Radsel, Z., Vatovec, J., Geczy, B., Cernelc, S., & Gros, A., Zupancic, J., Battelino, S., Lavrencak, b., & Zargi, M. (2006). Change of phonation control after cochlear implantation. Otology & Neurotology, 27(4), 499-503.
Horga, D., Liker, M. (2006). Voice and pronunciation of cochlear implant speakers. Clinical Linguistics &Phonetics, 20(2-3), 211-7.
Holt, R. F., Svirsky, M. A., Neuburger, H., & Miyamoto, R. T. (2004). Age at implantation and communicative outcome in pediatric cochlear implant users: Is younger always better? International Congress Series.1273, 368-371.
Kirk, K., Miyamoto, R., Ying, E., Lento, C., O’Neill, T., & Fears, F. (2002). Effects of age at implantation in young children. Annals of Otology, Rinology, and Laryngology, 111, 69–73.
Ladefoged, P. & Disner, S. F. (2012). Vowels and consonants (3). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Ladefoged, P., & Johnson, K. (2010). A course in phonetics. Boston: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Liker, M., Mildner, V., & Šindija, B. (2007). Acoustic analysis of the speech of children with cochlear implants: a longitudinal study. Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 21(1), 1-11.
Ling, D. (1993), Auditory-verbal options for children with hearing impairment: helping to pioneer an applied science. The Volta Review, 95, 187-196.
McConkey, A., Svirsky, M., & Iler Kirk, K. (1997). Children with implants can speak, but can they communicate? Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 117(3), 155-160.
Moog, J.S. (2002). Changing expectations for children with cochlear implants. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology, 111, 138-142.
Neumeyer, V., Harrington, J., & Draxler, C. (2010). An acoustic analysis of the vowel space in young and old cochlear-implant speakers. Clinical linguistics & phonetics, 24(9), 734-41.
Paatsch, L., Blamey, P., Sarant, J., & Bow, C. (2006). The effects of speech production and vocabulary training on different components of spoken language performance. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(1), 39-55.
Seifert, E., Oswald, M., Bruns, U., Vischer, M., Kompis, M., & Haeusler, R. (2002). Changes of voice and articulation in children with cochlear implants. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 66(2), 115-123.
Shikh Sang Tajan, S., & Bijankhan, M. (2013). The acoustic study of Persian vowels in CV syllables of citation form. Zabanpazhuhi, 4(8), 97-116. doiː10.22051/JLR.2013.1014 [In Persian].
Tobey, E.A., Geers, A.E., Brenner, C.B., Altuna, D., & Gabbert, G. (2003). Factors associated with development of speechproduction skills in children implanted by age five. Ear and Hearing, 24, 36-45.
Tye-Murray, N., Spencer, L., & Woodworth, G. (1995). Acquisition of speech by children who have prolonged cochlear implant experience. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 327-337.
Uchanski, R. M., & Geers, A. E. (2003). Acoustic characteristics of the speech of young cochlear implant users: a comparison with normal-hearing age-mates. Ear and hearing, 24(1), 90S-105S.
Verhoeven, J., Hide, O., De Maeyer, S., Gillis, S., & Gillis, S. (2016). Hearing impairment and vowel production. A comparison between normally hearing, hearing-aided and cochlear implanted Dutch children. Journal of communication disorders, 59, 24-39.
Wang, Y., Liang, F., Yang, J., Zhang, X., Liu, J., & Zheng, Y. (2017). The Acoustic Characteristics of the Voice in Cochlear-Implanted Children: A Longitudinal Study. Journal of Voice, 31(6), 21-26.
Poissant, S., Peters, K.A., & Robb, M. P. (2006). Acoustic and perceptual appraisal of speech production in pediatric cochlear implant users. International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 70 (7),1195-203.
Waltzman, S.B., & Roland, J.T.J. (2005). Cochlear implantation in children younger than 12 months. Pediatrics, 116, 487-493.
Young, N. (2002). Infant cochlear implantation and anesthetic risk. Annals of Otology, Rinology, andLaryngology, 111, 49-51.
Zamani, P., Zarandy, M. M., Borghei, P., Rezai, H., & Moubedshahi, F. (2016). The role of age implantation on formants frequency changing in early and late cochlear implanted children: a study based on perceptual and acoustical assessments. Auditory and Vestibular Research, 25(1), 24-31. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 526 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 414 |
||
