Autopercepção do ponto de constrição da língua nas fricativas alveolares
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2020-04-08
Autores
Abreu, Ana Clara Varella [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Introdução: A produção das fricativas alveolares requer constrição anterior precisa da língua, podendo ser percebida pelo próprio falante. Objetivo: Investigar relatos de autopercepção do ponto de constrição da língua na produção de [s] e [z] por mulheres com posicionamento de língua normal e alterado. Métodos: Três fonoaudiólogas analisaram gravações em vídeo da fala espontânea e dirigida de 49 jovens, com idades entre 18 e 28 anos (média=20 anos e 7 meses), classificando-as em: Grupo 1, (G1, n=25), com ausência de alterações no posicionamento da língua e Grupo 2 (G2, n=24), com presença destas alterações. Um treinamento inicial sobre o processo de produção dos sons da fala foi oferecido para todas as jovens, individualmente. O experimento de autopercepção de ponto de constrição da língua foi realizado solicitando a cada jovem de G1 e G2 que relatasse o local em que sua ponta da língua encostava (apical, laminal ou “outros ajustes”) ao produzir [s] e [z] durante a leitura de 24 palavras e 24 pseudopalavras. O teste de Friedman, com comparações para a par pelo teste de Wilcoxon, foi utilizado para análise intragrupo. O teste de Mann-Whitney foi utilizado para as comparações entre grupos. Adotou-se nível de significância de 5%. Resultados: Pontos de constrição apical e laminal na produção de [s] e [z] foram relatados pelas jovens de G1. Pontos de constrição de língua apical, laminal e, também, de “outros ajustes” de língua (região anterior da língua posicionada entre os dentes ou ao encontro dos mesmos) foram relatados pelas jovens de G2. Houve diferença significativa dos achados intragrupo (G1, p<0,001; G2, p<0,001), com menor média de relatos de “outros ajustes” em G2 e ausência desses relatos em G1. Houve diferença significativa entre grupos somente para relatos de “outros ajustes” de língua (p=0,002), sugerindo que esta categoria de resposta diferenciou os dois grupos. A análise dos achados por tipo de fricativa não indicou diferenças entre [s] e [z], no interior de cada grupo. Houve diferença entre os grupos, porém somente nas médias de relatos de “outros ajustes” de língua, tanto para [s] (p=0,004) quanto [z] (p=0,004). Na análise das palavras foi verificada diferença intergrupo nos relatos de “outros ajustes” de língua, tanto em [s] (p=0,004) quanto em [z] (p=0,004). Da mesma forma, na análise de pseudopalavras, houve diferença intergrupo nos relatos de “outros ajustes” de língua, em [s] (p=0,017) e [z] (p=0,008). Houve, ainda, diferença intragrupo (G1) para o ponto de constrição laminal (p=0,032), com maior ocorrência desse ponto em [s] do que em [z]. Conclusão: Jovens com posicionamento de língua normal relataram constrição de ponta língua apical ou laminal nas fricativas alveolares, enquanto jovens com posicionamento de língua alterado relataram ajustes distintos de língua (além de ponto apical ou laminal), o que diferenciou os dois grupos de jovens. As pseudopalavras favoreceram a autoperceção do ponto de constrição da língua em [s], pelas jovens com posicionamento de língua normal.
Introduction: The production of alveolar fricatives requires precise anterior constriction of the tongue, which can be perceived by the own speaker. Objective: To investigate self-perception reports of the tongue constriction in the production of [s] and [z] by women with normal and altered tongue positioning. Methods: Three Speech-Language Pathologists analyzed video recordings of spontaneous and automatic speech tasks of 49 young female, aged 18 and 28 years (mean = 20 years and 7 months), classified into: Group 1, (G1, n = 25), with no changes in tongue positioning and Group 2 (G2, n = 24), with the presence of altered tongue positioning. An initial training on the process of speech sounds production was individually offered to all participant. The experiment of self-perception of the tongue-tip constriction was performed asking each female (G1 and G2) to report the place where her tip of the tongue touched (apical, laminal or “other adjustments”) when producing [s] and [z] while reading 24 words and 24 pseudowords. The Friedman test, with comparisons for the pair by the Wilcoxon test, was used for intragroup analysis. The Mann-Whitney test was used for comparisons between groups. A significance level of 5% was adopted. Results: Apical and laminal tongue constrictions in the production of [s] and [z] were reported by females with no changes in tongue positioning (G1). Apical, laminal points of constriction and, also, “other adjustments” of the tongue (anterior region of the tongue positioned between or towards teeth) were reported by the young women in G2. There was a significant difference in the intragroup findings (G1, p<0.001; G2, p<0.001), with a lower average of reports of “other adjustments” in G2 and absence of these reports in G1. There was a significant difference between groups only for reports of “other tongue adjustments” (p=0.002), suggesting that this category of response differentiated the two groups. The analysis of findings by type of fricative did not indicate differences between [s] and [z], within each group. There was a difference between the groups, but only in the average of reports of "other adjustments" of the tongue, both for [s] (p=0.004) and [z] (p=0.004). In the analysis of words, an intergroup difference was found in the self-reports of “other adjustments” of the tongue for both [s] (p=0.004) and [z] (p=0.004). Likewise, in the analysis of pseudowords, there was an intergroup difference in the self-reports of “other tongue adjustments”, for [s] (p=0.017) and [z] (p=0.008). There was also an intragroup difference (G1) for the laminal constriction (p=0.032), with a higher occurrence of this constriction in [s] than in [z]. Conclusion: Young female with normal tongue positioning reported apical or laminal tongue-tip constriction in the alveolar fricatives, while young female with altered tongue positioning reported other distinct tongue adjustments (besides apical or laminal constriction), which differentiated these two groups of speakers. The pseudowords favored the self-perception of the point of constriction of the tongue in [s], by the female with normal tongue positioning.
Introduction: The production of alveolar fricatives requires precise anterior constriction of the tongue, which can be perceived by the own speaker. Objective: To investigate self-perception reports of the tongue constriction in the production of [s] and [z] by women with normal and altered tongue positioning. Methods: Three Speech-Language Pathologists analyzed video recordings of spontaneous and automatic speech tasks of 49 young female, aged 18 and 28 years (mean = 20 years and 7 months), classified into: Group 1, (G1, n = 25), with no changes in tongue positioning and Group 2 (G2, n = 24), with the presence of altered tongue positioning. An initial training on the process of speech sounds production was individually offered to all participant. The experiment of self-perception of the tongue-tip constriction was performed asking each female (G1 and G2) to report the place where her tip of the tongue touched (apical, laminal or “other adjustments”) when producing [s] and [z] while reading 24 words and 24 pseudowords. The Friedman test, with comparisons for the pair by the Wilcoxon test, was used for intragroup analysis. The Mann-Whitney test was used for comparisons between groups. A significance level of 5% was adopted. Results: Apical and laminal tongue constrictions in the production of [s] and [z] were reported by females with no changes in tongue positioning (G1). Apical, laminal points of constriction and, also, “other adjustments” of the tongue (anterior region of the tongue positioned between or towards teeth) were reported by the young women in G2. There was a significant difference in the intragroup findings (G1, p<0.001; G2, p<0.001), with a lower average of reports of “other adjustments” in G2 and absence of these reports in G1. There was a significant difference between groups only for reports of “other tongue adjustments” (p=0.002), suggesting that this category of response differentiated the two groups. The analysis of findings by type of fricative did not indicate differences between [s] and [z], within each group. There was a difference between the groups, but only in the average of reports of "other adjustments" of the tongue, both for [s] (p=0.004) and [z] (p=0.004). In the analysis of words, an intergroup difference was found in the self-reports of “other adjustments” of the tongue for both [s] (p=0.004) and [z] (p=0.004). Likewise, in the analysis of pseudowords, there was an intergroup difference in the self-reports of “other tongue adjustments”, for [s] (p=0.017) and [z] (p=0.008). There was also an intragroup difference (G1) for the laminal constriction (p=0.032), with a higher occurrence of this constriction in [s] than in [z]. Conclusion: Young female with normal tongue positioning reported apical or laminal tongue-tip constriction in the alveolar fricatives, while young female with altered tongue positioning reported other distinct tongue adjustments (besides apical or laminal constriction), which differentiated these two groups of speakers. The pseudowords favored the self-perception of the point of constriction of the tongue in [s], by the female with normal tongue positioning.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Fala, Percepção da fala, Distúrbios da fala, Transtornos da articulação, Adulto, Speech, Speech perception, Speech disorders, Articulation disorders, Adult