Taxonomies in Biology, Phonetics, Phonology, and Speech Motor Control

Abstract

This article begins with a review explaining the different purposes of biological taxonomies. Taxonomic units are often dependent on the purpose for which the taxonomy has been constructed. Biological taxonomies provide an analogy that we use to emphasize some of the distinctions among the units of phonetic transcription systems, competence phonologies, and performance phonologies. The units of both phonology and phonetic transcription are considered as possible units of the speech motor system, and some of the difficulties of this assumption are explained. Although phonemic units, like units of phonetic transcription, are useful for many purposes, it is not theoretically necessary to use units derived as part of competence phonologies in systems attempting to explain phonological performance or speech motor performance. In this regard, we challenge the concept of coarticulation, because it is based on assumptions about the role of phonological or phonetic units in speech motor control. We offer an integrated perspective that has implications for research in speech motor control and deficits of the speech motor system. We see speech motor deficits as distinct from, yet possibly interacting with, phonological deficits.

Developmental Aspects of Formant Frequency and Bandwidth in Infants and Toddlers

“…First, due to the developmental nature of the present study, vowel samples were obtained during early age periods when the children were producing preword (e.g.. babbling) vocalizations as well as identifiable word forms. Be cause preword vocalizations arc not thought to be rep resentative of a mature linguistic system, assignment of specific vowel types was deemed inappropriate [ 16]. Second, use of conventional 1PA symbols often fails to capture certain qualities of young children's vowel p r o ductions [17], The selection of vowcl-likc sounds was aided by listening to the audio playback of the signal in combination with a narrowband (24-Hz) spectrographic display of the vocalization.…”

Grand Rounds for Sound System Disorder. Conclusion: What was Learned

“…The articles cor~tributed here, and papers like those by Folkins and Bleile (1990), indicate that numerous investigators and teams are skillfully studying sound system disorders in the context of language and communication. However, there is little commonality in the use of constructs or procedures, and there is little of the replication that advanced our understanding of cleft palate speech as consistent trends in findings emerged from similar studies conducted in different centers.…”

Phonological encoding in apraxia of speech and aphasia

“…This suggests that speakers cannot prepare combinations of articulatory gestures unless these combinations correspond to phonemes. If the preparation effect were motor-based, then such a motor-based interpretation must be constrained to assume isomorphy between motor plans and phoneme representations, though there is no reason a priori to assume such isomorphy (Folkins & Bleile, 1990).…”