Pozvana predavanja

Govorne pogreške

Dr. Damir Horga, red. prof.
Odsjek za fonetiku
Filozofski fakultet, Sveučilišta u Zagrebu

U procesu govorne proizvodnje govornik kao obavijesni procesor proizvodi obavijesti, jezično ih oblikuje i artikulacijski materijalizira u govornom zvuku upućenom slušatelju. Budući da govornik nije idealan i nepogrešiv stroj u tom složenom procesu preoblikovanja obavijesti događaju se pogreške. Govorne se pogreške sakupljaju i analiziraju već dulje od stotinjak godina s različitom svrhom. Putem govornih pogrešaka pokušavalo se otkriti podsvjesne mehanizme kognitivnih i emocionalnih stanja govornika (Meringer i Mayer 1895, Freud 1901). U području lingvističkih istraživanja govorne pogreške bile su put da se otkriju skrivene karakteristike mentalne reprezentacije jezičnih kategorija i procesa govorne proizvodnje. Na temelju analize govornih pogrešaka izgrađene su teorije i modeli govorne proizvodnje (Fromkin 1973, Garrett 1975,1993, Levelt 1994, Dell 1986). Rezultati su dobiveni analizom kompjutoriziranih korpusa govornih pogrešaka uglavnom za odrasle govornike engleskoga, njemačkog i nizozemskog jezika. Uz stanoviti zastoj u tim istraživanjima krajem prošlog stoljeća ona se ipak šire na druge jezike (Wells-Jensen, 1999), druge dobne skupine (Jaeger (2005), afazične govornike (Stemberger 1984, Rapp i Goldrick, 2000) i govornike drugog jezika u različitim stadijima njegovog učenja (Awuku 2003). Uz pregled glavnih pitanja i rezultata u istraživanju govornih pogrešaka u ovom se radu opisuje i korpus govornih pogrešaka sakupljen u okviru projekta Proizvodnja i percepcija govora na Odsjeku za fonetiku Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.

Analysing children’s speech production: from single words to connected speech

Dr Sara Howard
Reader in Clinical Phonetics
Department of Human Communication Sciences
University of Sheffield, UK

It has frequently been observed that children with impaired speech production are less intelligible in connected speech and conversation, than in the production of single words. This should not strike us as particularly surprising: the literature tells us that single words are produced differently from words in connected speech in typical adult speech production, both because of well-documented and predictable phonetic and phonological events which take place at word boundaries in connected speech, and also because connected speech requires the balancing of articulatory and prosodic behaviours over long domains. What should, perhaps, strike us as noteworthy is the paucity of research into connected speech development, either in typically-developing children, or those with impaired speech production. This talk explores the ways in which clinical phonetic investigation can contribute to our understanding of connected speech development in typically-developing children and those with impaired speech production. The discussion draws on perceptual and instrumental phonetic data to focus specifically on the ways in which the speech output of speakers with a speech impairment differs between speech produced in a clinical context and in “real” conversational settings, and between single word production and the production of multi-word utterances or “connected speech”. The relationship between articulatory and prosodic behaviours in connected speech is explored in a range of atypical speech data, in order to examine how individual speakers use different strategies to balance the demands of intelligibility and acceptability in the face of speech production constraints.

Cerebral representation and processing in native language acquisition and foreign language learning

Dr Michel Paradis
Emeritus Professor
McGill University
Cognitive Neuroscience center, UQAM (Université du Québec à Montréal)
Montréal, Canada

The manner in which two languages are represented in a bilingual’s brain differs according to whether the languages were learned simultaneously or sequentially. In addition to the conceptual system, four cerebral mechanisms are involved in verbal communication: implicit linguistic competence, explicit metalinguistic knowledge, pragmatic capacities, and motivation. Each mechanism is susceptible to independent impairment as a function of site of lesion and is sustained by different cerebral structures; each is necessary but none is sufficient. All are involved in early and late bilingualism, but to quite different extents. Every individual with a normal foxp2 gene and without severe mental defects acquires a native language. Not everyone who has acquired an L1 manages to acquire an L2. Not just the manner of appropriation, but the nature of what is appropriated (competence versus knowledge) is affected by age of acquisition. The acquisition of implicit competence is influenced by age both biologically (gradual loss of plasticity of the procedural memory for language after about age 5) and cognitively (greater reliance on declarative memory for learning in general and, consequently, for learning a language from about age 7). Each of early acquired languages is sustained by similar cerebral mechanisms in the same macro-anatomical regions while remaining distinct at the micro-anatomical level (procedural memory). Contrastingly, each later learned language uses different types of mechanisms that are sustained by different cerebral areas (declarative memory). Neuroimaging studies show greater right-hemisphere activation (associated with more extensive reliance on pragmatics). They also show greater activations in areas associated with declarative memory and conscious control – evidence that L2 relies on metalinguistic knowledge to a greater extent. As a result, there are considerable inter-individual differences in level of ultimate achievement due to factors such as IQ, working memory span, attention span, level of education, degree of motivation (that are irrelevant for native language(s) acquisition), as well as differences across phonology, morphology, and syntax – suggesting an optimal period for acquiring implicit linguistic competence. The earlier speakers are exposed to the second language, the better their chances of acquiring the language like a native speaker. Acquisition and learning and their outcome (competence/knowledge) are qualitatively different. Unlike children, adults need explicit instruction to become aware of non salient grammatical features (including phonological) in order to notice them and practice them so that, through extensive use in meaningful communicative settings, they may eventually acquire these non-native language features.