Dialect identification, intelligibility ratings, and acceptability ratings of dysarthric speech in two American English dialects.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-21 DOI:10.1080/02699206.2023.2301337
Jacqueline Laures-Gore, Caitlin Ray Rogers, Hannah Griffey, Kenneth G Rice, Scott Russell, Michael Frankel, Rupal Patel
{"title":"Dialect identification, intelligibility ratings, and acceptability ratings of dysarthric speech in two American English dialects.","authors":"Jacqueline Laures-Gore, Caitlin Ray Rogers, Hannah Griffey, Kenneth G Rice, Scott Russell, Michael Frankel, Rupal Patel","doi":"10.1080/02699206.2023.2301337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current study explored the intelligibility and acceptability ratings of dysarthric speakers with African American English (AAE) and General American English (GAE) dialects by listeners who identify as GAE or AAE speakers, as well as listener ability to identify dialect in dysarthric speech. Eighty-six listeners rated the intelligibility and acceptability of sentences extracted from a passage read by speakers with dysarthria. Samples were used from the Atlanta Motor Speech Disorders Corpus and ratings were collected via self-report. The listeners identified speaker dialect in a forced-choice format. Listeners self-reported their dialect and exposure to AAE. AAE dialect was accurately identified in 63.43% of the the opportunities; GAE dialect was accurately identified in 70.35% of the opportunities. Listeners identifying as AAE speakers rated GAE speech as more acceptable, whereas, listeners identifying as GAE speakers rated AAE speech as more acceptable. Neither group of listeners demonstrated a difference in intelligibility ratings. Exposure to AAE had no effect on intelligibility or acceptability ratings. Listeners can identify dialect (AAE and GAE) with a better than chance degree of accuracy. One's dialect may have an effect on intelligibility and acceptability ratings. Exposure to a dialect did not affect listener ratings of intelligibility or acceptability.</p>","PeriodicalId":49219,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics","volume":" ","pages":"1055-1066"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699206.2023.2301337","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current study explored the intelligibility and acceptability ratings of dysarthric speakers with African American English (AAE) and General American English (GAE) dialects by listeners who identify as GAE or AAE speakers, as well as listener ability to identify dialect in dysarthric speech. Eighty-six listeners rated the intelligibility and acceptability of sentences extracted from a passage read by speakers with dysarthria. Samples were used from the Atlanta Motor Speech Disorders Corpus and ratings were collected via self-report. The listeners identified speaker dialect in a forced-choice format. Listeners self-reported their dialect and exposure to AAE. AAE dialect was accurately identified in 63.43% of the the opportunities; GAE dialect was accurately identified in 70.35% of the opportunities. Listeners identifying as AAE speakers rated GAE speech as more acceptable, whereas, listeners identifying as GAE speakers rated AAE speech as more acceptable. Neither group of listeners demonstrated a difference in intelligibility ratings. Exposure to AAE had no effect on intelligibility or acceptability ratings. Listeners can identify dialect (AAE and GAE) with a better than chance degree of accuracy. One's dialect may have an effect on intelligibility and acceptability ratings. Exposure to a dialect did not affect listener ratings of intelligibility or acceptability.

两种美国英语方言的方言识别、可懂度评分和障碍性语音的可接受性评分。
本研究探讨了听者在辨别构音障碍者言语中的方言时的能力,以及听者在辨别构音障碍者言语中的方言时的能力,这些听者是指具有非裔美国人英语(AAE)和普通美国人英语(GAE)方言的构音障碍者。86 名听者对从构音障碍者朗读的一段话中提取的句子的可懂度和可接受性进行了评分。样本来自亚特兰大运动性言语障碍语料库,评分通过自我报告收集。听者以强迫选择的形式识别说话者的方言。听者自我报告他们的方言和接触 AAE 的情况。在 63.43% 的机会中,AAE 方言被准确识别;在 70.35% 的机会中,GAE 方言被准确识别。自称为 AAE 说话者的听众认为 GAE 的语音更容易接受,而自称为 GAE 说话者的听众则认为 AAE 的语音更容易接受。两组听者的可懂度评分均无差异。接触 AAE 对可懂度或可接受性评分没有影响。听者识别方言(AAE 和 GAE)的准确度高于概率。一个人的方言可能会对可懂度和可接受性评分产生影响。接触方言不会影响听者对可懂度和可接受性的评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics
Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
74
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics encompasses the following: Linguistics and phonetics of disorders of speech and language; Contribution of data from communication disorders to theories of speech production and perception; Research on communication disorders in multilingual populations, and in under-researched populations, and languages other than English; Pragmatic aspects of speech and language disorders; Clinical dialectology and sociolinguistics; Childhood, adolescent and adult disorders of communication; Linguistics and phonetics of hearing impairment, sign language and lip-reading.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信