Context Conditioned Error Patterns in Disordered Systems

Abstract

This chapter reviews and expands the literature on consonantvowel (CV) interactions in developing sound systems (normal and disordered) and explores the usefulness of current phonetic models (Davis and MacNeilage, 1995;Kent and Bauer, 1985;MacNeilage and Davis, 1990b;Studdert-Kennedy and Goodell, 1995) in accounting for and predicting the occurrence of these phenomena. The phonetic models provide a biological perspective insofar as the immature pronunciations of the normally developing child are viewed as systematic reflections of organic constraints imposed by the child's developing phonetic systems, both perceptual and motor. In the clinical setting, context conditioning manifests itself most frequently as consonantal speech errors, which only occur in specific vocalic contexts, although recent research has also uncovered evidence of vowel errors conditioned by consonantal context (Bates and Watson, 1995;Reynolds, 1990). Such interdependencies accord well with current phonetically orientated models of speech acquisition and have important implications for clinical practice.In espousing this approach, we do not intend to overlook the benefits of an analysis in terms of recent developments in phonological theory. This is an approach robustly argued in Harris, Watson, and Bates (1999), and taken up in Chapter 6. Rather, we consider the extent to which current phonetic models of speech acquisition contribute to an understanding of disordered child speech. Research into early speech production has traditionally concentrated on the order of acquisition of individual segments, especially consonants, carrying with it the assumption that vowels and consonants are under independent con-145

Learning and teaching phonetic transcription for clinical purposes

“…Vieregge and Maassen (1999) suggest that, as far as atypical developmental speech data goes, vowels are generally harder to transcribe than consonants. But students need to learn how to use phonetic symbols to make narrow transcriptions of vowels, just as much as consonants, to capture both important aspects of sociophonetic and developmental variation (Local, 1983) and also the important interactions between consonants and vowels in syllable production in developing and/or atypical speech (Ball, 1991;Bates, Watson and Scobbie, 2002).…”

Vowel targeted intervention for children with persisting speech difficulties: Impact on intelligibility

“…During the intervention, consideration was given to vowels at both syllabic and segmental level to facilitate planning and production in a variety of CV, VC and then CVC contexts. The interaction between vowels and adjacent consonants (both pre- and post-vocalically) may facilitate or hinder production (Bates et al, 2002). For example, there is evidence from clinical practice that production of velar plosives is facilitated by combining /k/ or /ɡ/ with back vowels such as /ɑ/ or /ɔ/ rather than front vowels like /æ/ or /i/, which encourage ‘front’ plosives like /t/ and /d/.…”

My Client Is Using Non-English Sounds! A Tutorial in Advanced Phonetic Transcription Part II: Vowels and Diacritics

“…Reynolds 2002 Watson, andScobbie (2002, quoting Fudge, 1969) gave the example of doggie realized as [ ] by a normally developing child age 1;4 (years;months).…”

“…Chin (2003) ; and two lax vowel symbols, one in the mid position and the other in an opener position ([ , ]). Reynolds (2002) noted that one disordered realization of shoes by his Child M was [ ], and Bates et al (2002) recorded [ ] as a realization of boots. This last, however, is most likely a reflection of the centralized quality of /u/ in the target accent (Scottish English), and thus not an example of disordered usage.…”