Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityThe parameters speech activity and phonationtime solely do therefore not give a clear explanationto vocal fatigue. However, child B,who suffers from vocal fatigue by the end of theday presents us with an amount of phonationtime comparable to what has been found forpre-school teachers (Masuda et al. 1993).Hoarseness vs. fundamental frequencyChild B presents us with particularly high meanF0 - much higher then F0 under controlled condition- and a broad F0-range in the morning,followed by an increase of hoarseness later inthe day. However, Child C with fairly high F0-increase over the day and a high F0-range is notaffected by a change of hoarseness for theworse. Child A with fairly stable mean F0 andF0-range over the day presents us with higherdegree of hoarseness after the morning recordings.Child D with comparably stable meanF0 and F0-range on the other hand improvedthe voice condition over the day.The use of high F0, a high F0-range solelydoes not seem to account for voice deterioration.Hoarseness vs. speech intensityThe child (B) producing speech at highestloudness level is the one that suffers most fromincreased voice problems later in the day.Strenuous speech production with high intensitytherefore seems to be an important parameterto take into consideration when accountingfor voice problems in children.Hoarseness vs. speech intensity andbackground noiseThe children react in a different way to the levelof background noise. Being exposed to a highlevel of background noise, one of the activechildren (B) seems to be triggered for a loudvoice use, whereas one other speech activechild (C) does not behave in the same way, butproduces a much softer voice. The child reactingwith a stronger voice (B) also responds withincreased hoarseness later in the day.As has been presented in the results, thechildren never produce speech at a loudness of9.1dB above background noise, the level thathad been found by Södersten et al. to occur forpre-school teachers. However, normalizationwith regard to microphone distance for thechildren’s speech might be a question to beconsidered, since no comparable normalisationhas been carried out for the recordings of thebackground noise.General discussionIt can be found that child B refers to a typicalchild in a risk zone who suffers from voiceproblems by the end of the day due to hazardousvoice use: being a lively child in a verynoisy environment leads to making use of aloud, strong voice with a relatively high fundamentalfrequency and a high fundamental frequencyrange, resulting in vocal fatigue at theend of the day, reflected by an increase ofhoarseness. The results for this child agree withSödersten et al. that producing high fundamentalfrequency at high vocal loudness can lead tovocal trauma.Child A on the other hand does not showany particularly unusual voice use. However thedegree of hoarseness was already very high inthe first recording made in the morning and increasesfurther in during the day. The high degreeof hoarseness could have had influence onthe calculation of different acoustic measurements,e.g. phonation time is fairly low, becausethe algorithm is not able to pick periodicalparts of speech. Even the low measure ofintensity might have been affected, since voicedsounds show stronger intensity, which might belacking due to the child’s high degree ofhoarseness. It should however be noted thatchild A does not present us with high numberof measurements on speech activity, so that alow degree of phonation time is unlikely to bebased on period picking problems. This childmight have a predisposition for a hoarse voice,or an already obtained voice problem.Child C seems to be typical for a lively childwith high speech activity (Table 1) and a broadF0-range (Table 2). On the other hand, thischild shows lowest speech intensity (Table 3)which seems to be a good prerequisite to preventvoice problems. This child presents uswith a somewhat higher degree of hoarsenessthen child B, but there is no change for worseover the day. When taking a look at how childC uses her voice, one can find out that she ishumming a lot by herself.Child D is most lively in the afternoon,where the degree of hoarseness is lowest (Table1). Obviously, this child is seems to need towarm up the voice during the day, which resultsin highest activity later in the day combinedwith best voice condition.124
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityIn summary, the children behave in a differentway. Being an active child in a noisy environmentcan lead to a high level of speech activityand phonation time, and high F0 and F0range. However, increase of hoarseness ratherseems to occur if speech is produced with highintensity on top of high level measures of theother parameters. The child reacting with alouder voice also responds with increasedhoarseness later in the day. As has been shownabove, another speech active child’s voice hasnot been affected in the same direction as itproduces speech at a much weaker intensity.Sala, E., Airo, E., Olkinuora, P., Simberg, S.,Ström, U., Laine, A., Pentti, J. & Suonpää,J. (2002) Vocal loading among day carecenter teachers. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology.;27:21-28.Södersten, M., Granqvist, S., Hammarberg, B.,and Szabo, A. (2002). Vocal behavior andvocal loading factors for preschool teachersat work studied with binaural DAT recordings.Journal of Voice, 16(3), 356–371.ConclusionsA lively child with high speech activity in anoisy environment feeling the need to competewith the background noise by producing loudspeech is at risk to suffer from vocal fatigue. Anequally lively child without the need to makeher/himself heard in en equally noisy environmentprevents a child from a similar outcome.Putting a high vocal load on the voice by producingspeech at a high intensity level is thereforelikely to be the key-parameter leading to araised level of hoarseness. A child with a predispositionfor hoarseness seems to be at risk tosuffer from even stronger hoarseness later in theday even if there are no signs for extreme use ofthe voice.ReferencesFritzell, B. (1996). Voice disorders and occupations.Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, 21,7-21.Granqvist, S. (2001). The self-to-other ratio appliedas a phonation detector. Paper presentedat: The IV Pan European Voice Conference,Stockholm August 2001.Masuda, T., Ikeda, Y., Manako, H., and Komiyama,S. (1993). Analysis of vocal abuse:fluctuations in phonation time and intensityin 4 groups of speakers, Acta Oto-Laryngol.113(4), 547–552.McAllister, A., Granqvist, S., Sjölander, P.,Sundberg, J. 2008 (in press) Child voiceand noise, A pilot study of noise in day caresand the effects on 10 childrens’ voicequality according to perceptual evaluation.Journal of Voicedoi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.10.017Ohlsson, A.-C. (1988). Voice and Working Environments.Gothenburg: Gothenburg University(doctoral dissertation).125
Page 1 and 2:
Department of LinguisticsProceeding
Page 3 and 4:
Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 123: Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 127 and 128: Proceedings, FOETIK 2009, Dept. of
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227:
Department of LinguisticsPhonetics
show all

Proceedings Fonetik 2009 - Institutionen för lingvistik

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?