Therapeutic Science for Rehabilitation (재활치료과학)

Korean Society of Neurological Occupational Therapy (대한신경계작업치료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Characteristics of Right Hemispheric Damaged Patients in Korean Focused Prosodic Sentences

한국어 초점 발화 시 우반구 손상인의 초점 운율 특성

  • Lee, Myung Soon (Dept. of Speech Therapy, Sangjiyoungseu College) ;
  • Park, Hyun (Dept. of Speech Therapy, Sangjiyoungseu College)
  • 이명순 (상지영서대학교 언어치료과) ;
  • 박현 (상지영서대학교 언어치료과)
  • Received : 2019.04.10
  • Accepted : 2019.07.16
  • Published : 2019.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics of prosody of ambiguous sentences in patients with right hemisphere damage(RHD). Methods: Sentences with each word prosodically focused were used to investigate. Several acoustic parameters such as intensity, F0, and duration were measured to identify characteristics of prosody in patients with lesions in the right hemisphere and normal controls. All speech samples were recorded using the Praat 4.3.14 software. Data were analyzed with the independent sample t-test using SPSS 18.0. Results: The results of this study are as follows: First, intensity of the first syllable of the focus word was different between the two groups in several sentences. Second, F0 was different between the two groups in all sentences. Third, duration was different between the groups in several sentences. Accordingly, prosody were varied and values of acoustic parameters differed due to the focus of utterance. The group with right hemisphere damage showed restricted prosody. Conclusions: Intensity, duration, and F0 are all used as elements of prosody in emphasizing structural and pragmatic meaning, but according to the focus, strength and duration were related to F0. In contrast, F0 has a significant linguistic difference, but there was a significant difference between the RHD and normal people, so F0 can be a discriminatory factor of rhyme evaluation of the right hemisphere damaged and it is necessary to accumulate more strong evidence through future research.

목적: 본 연구의 목적은 우반구 손상인에게 대조 초점의 중의성 문장에 대한 운율 특성을 알아보고자 하였다. 연구방법: 본 연구는 본 연구는 초점 운율을 조사하기 위해서 강도, F0, 지속시간 등의 음향학적 매개변수를 검사하였다. 정상인과 우반구 손상인의 모든 구어 샘플은 Praat 4.3.14로 분석하였으며 SPSS 18.0을 사용하여 독립 t-test를 통해 자료를 분석하였다. 결과: 본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 첫음절의 강도는 집단 간 유의미한 차이를 나타내었다. 둘째, F0은 모든 집단에서 유의미한 차이를 나타내었다. 셋째, 지속시간은 모든 집단에서 유의미한 차이를 나타내었다. 결론: 강도, 지속시간, F0는 모두 구조적 화용적 의미를 강조하는 데 있어서 운율의 요소로써 사용되지만, 초점에 따라서 강도와 지속시간은 F0와 연관성이 있었다. 그에 비해 F0는 언어학적으로도 유의미한 차이가 있었지만 손상인과 정상인 간에도 유의미한 차이가 있었기 때문에 F0는 우반구 손상인의 운율적 평가의 변별 요인이 될 수 있으며 차후의 연구를 통해 더 강력한 증거를 축적할 필요가 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abusamra, V. (2009). Communication Impairments in patients with right hemisphere damage. Life Span and Disability, 12(1), 67-82.
  2. Blonder, L., Pickering, J., Heath, R., Smith, C., & Butler, S.(1995). Prosodic characteristics of speech pre- and post-right hemisphere stroke, Brain and Language, 51, 318-335. doi:10.1006/brln.1995.1063
  3. Banich, M. T.(2004). Cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
  4. Baum, S. R. (1998). The role of the fundamental frequency and duration in the perception of linguistic stress by individuals with brain damage. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research. 41(2), 31-40. doi:10.1044/jslhr.4101.31
  5. Boersma, P., & Weenik, D. (2005). Praat. Retrieved from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat
  6. Brookshire, R. H. (2007). Introduction to neurogenic cognitive disorders(7th ed). Minneapolis, MO: Mosby.
  7. Jeon, E. J. (1991). Experimental phonetic study of 'focus' of current Korean (Master's thesis). Seoul University, Seoul.
  8. Jeon, Y. C. (2005). Contrastive focus in Korean. Journal of Linguistic society of Korea, 43, 215-237.
  9. Joanette, Y., Goulet, P., Hannequin, D., & Boeglin, J. (1990). Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer-Verlag Publishing.
  10. Kang, B. M., Kwak, E. J., Nam, S. H., Yoon, Y. E., Lee, K. Y., Lee, M. H., ... Hong, M. P. (1999). Formal semantics and Korean language skills. Seoul: Hansin munhwasa.
  11. Kim, H, H., & Na, D, L(2001). Korean-Western Aphasia Battery. Seoul: Paradise.
  12. Kim, Y. B. (2004). Focus, topic and their phonetic relevance. Journal of Language and Information, 8(1), 27-52. https://doi.org/10.29403/LI.8.1.2
  13. Lee, M. S. (2012). A comparative study on the prosodic characteristics of the sentences with syntactic ambiguity of right hemisphere damaged patients. Journal of Linguistic Science, 61, 185-206.
  14. Myers, P. S. (1999). Right hemisphere damage : Disorders of communication and cognition. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group, INC.
  15. Nilsenova, M. (2006). Rise and fall: Studies in the semantics and pragmatics of intonation (Doctoral dissertation). University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
  16. Raithel, A. V. (2003). Perception of intonation contours and use of focus by aphasic and healthy individuals. Retrieved from https://www.uni-bielefeld.de/lili/personen/vgramley/summary_raithel.pdf
  17. Ross, E., Thompson, R. D., & Yenkosky, J. (1997). Lateralization of prosody in brain and the callosal integration of hemispheric language function. Brain and Language, 56, 27-54. doi:10.1006/brln.1997.1731
  18. Schirmer, A., Alter, K., Kotz, S. A., & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Lateralization of prosody during language production : A lesion study, Brain and Language, 76, 1-17. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2381
  19. Schotz, S. (2003). Prosody in relation to paralinguistic phonetics-early ad recent definitions, distinctions and discussion: Term paper at the department of linguistics and phonetics. Lund: Lund University.
  20. Shapiro, B. E., & Danly, M. (1985). The role of the right hemisphere in the control of speech prosody in propositional and affective contexts. Brain and Language, 25, 19-36. doi:10.1016/0093-934X(85)90118-X
  21. Tomkins, C. A. (1995). Right hemisphere communication disorders: Theory and management. London: Singular publishing group.
  22. Tuker, D. M., Watson, R. T., & Heilman, K. M. (1977). Discrimination and evocation of affectively intonation speech in patients with right parietal disease. Neurology, 27, 947-950. doi: 10.1212/wnl.27.10.947
  23. Van Lancker, D., & Siditis, J. J.(1992). The identification of affective prosodic stimuli by left and right hemisphere damaged subjects: A errors are not created equal. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 963-970. doi:10.1044/jshr.3505.963
  24. Walker, J. P., Joseph, L., & Goodman, J.(2009). The production of linguistic prosody in subjects with aphasia, Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 23, 529-549. doi:10.1080/02699200902946944