Interaction between prosody and intelligibility

References

• Borod J. C., Alpert M., Brozgold A., Martin C., Welkowitz J., Diller L., Peselow E., Angrist B., Lieberman A. A preliminary comparison on flat affect schizophrenics and brain-damaged patients on measures of affective processing. Journal of Communication Disorders 1989; 22: 93–104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunton K., Kent R., Kent J., Rosenbek J. Perceptuo-acoustic assessment of prosodic impairment in dysarthria. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2000; 14: 13–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunton K., Kent R., Kent J., Duffy J. The effects of flattening fundamental frequency contours on sentence intelligibility in speakers with dysarthria. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2001; 15: 181–193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casby M. W. Otitis media and language development: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2001; 10: 65–80
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danly M., Shapiro B. Speech prosody in Broca's aphasia. Brain and Language 1982; 16: 171–190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Bodt M. S., Hernández-Díaz Huici M. E., Van De Heyning P. H. Intelligibility as a linear combination of dimensions in dysarthric speech. Journal of Communication Disorders 2002; 35: 283–292
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold T. Perception and production of prosodic features by hearing impaired children. A paper presented at the Convention of the American Speech and Hearing Association, Washington, DC, November, 1975
   Google Scholar
• Greene D. S. Fundamental frequency of the speech of profoundly deaf individuals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purde University, West Lafayette, IN 1956
   Google Scholar
• Hartelius L., Svensson P., Bubach A. Clinical assessment of dysarthria: Performance on a dysarthria test by normal adult subjects, and by individuals with Parkinson's disease or with multiple sclerosis. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology 1993; 18: 131–141
   Google Scholar
• Haycock G. S. The teaching of speech. Hill and Ainsworth, Stoke-on-Trent 1933
   Google Scholar
• Hood R. B. Some physical concomitants of the perception of speech rhythm of the deaf. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 1966
   Google Scholar
• Kalikow D., Stevens K., Elliot L. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1977; 61: 1337–1351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent R. D., Netsell R., Abbs J. H. Acoustic characteristics of dysarthria associated with cerebellar disease. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1979; 22: 627–648
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim H. H. Monotony of speech production in Parkinson's disease: Acoustic entities and their perceptual relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 1994
   Google Scholar
• Klouda G. V., Robin D. A., Graff-Radford N. R., Cooper W. The role of callosal connections in speech prosody. Brain and Language 1988; 35: 154–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laures J., Weismer G. The effects of a flattened fundamental frequency on intelligibility at the sentence level. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 1999; 42: 1148–1156
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeDorze G., Dionne L., Ryalls J., Julien M., Ouellett L. The effect of speech and language therapy for a case of dysarthria associated with Parkinson's disease. European Journal of Disorders of Communication 1992; 27: 313–324
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lenden J. M., Flipsen P. Prosody and voice characteristics of children with cochlear implants. Journal of Communication Disorders 2006; 40: 66–81
   Google Scholar
• McGarr N. S. The production and reception of prosodic features. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the A.G. Bell Association, Boston, MA, June, 1976
   Google Scholar
• McGarr N. S., Osberger M. J. Pitch deviancy and intelligibility of deaf speech. Journal of Communication Disorders 1978; 11: 237–247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metz D. E., Schiavetti N., Sitler R. Toward an objective description of the dependent and independent variables associated with intelligibility assessments of hearing impaired adults. Speech assessment and speech improvement for the hearing impaired, J. Subtelny. A.G. Bell Association for the Deaf, Washington, DC 1980; 72–81
   Google Scholar
• Monsen R. B. Acoustic qualities of phonation in young hearing-impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1979; 22: 270–288
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Müller N., Ball M. J. Transcribing prosody. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2009; 11: 305–307
   Google Scholar
• Öster A. The effects of prosodic and segmental deviations on intelligibility of deaf speech. STL-QPSR 1990; 31: 79–88
   Google Scholar
• Parkhurst B., Levitt H. The effect of selected prosodic errors on the intelligibility of deaf speech. Journal of Communication Disorders 1978; 11: 249–256
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peppé S. J. E. Why is prosody in speech-language pathology so difficult?. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 2009; 11: 258–271
   Google Scholar
• Ross E. D. The aprosodias: Functional-anatomic organization of the affective components of language in the right hemisphere. Archives of Neurology 1981; 38: 561–569
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross E. D., Mesulam M. M. Dominant language functions of the right hemisphere?: Prosody and emotional gesturing. Archives of Neurology 1979; 36: 144–148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross E. D., Harney J. H., deLacoste-Utamsing C., Purdy P. D. How the brain integrates effective and propositional language into a unified behavioral function. Archives of Neurology 1981; 38: 745–748
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schiavetti N. Scaling procedures for the measurement of speech intelligibility. Intelligibility in speech disorders: Theory, measurement and management, R. Kent. John Benjamins, Amsterdam 1992; 11–34
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro B., Danly M. The role of the right hemisphere in the control of speech prosody in propositional and affective contexts. Brain and Language 1985; 25: 19–36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark R. E., Levitt H. Prosodic feature reception and production in deaf children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1974; 55: S63
   Google Scholar
• Theodoros D. G., Murdoch B. E., Chenery H. J. Perceptual speech characteristics of dysarthric speakers following severe closed head injury. Brain Injury 1994; 8: 101–124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Riper C., Emerick L. Speech correction7th ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1984
   Google Scholar
• Wang Y. T., Kent R. D., Duffy J. R., Thomas J. E. Dysarthria associated with traumatic brain injury: Speaking rate and emphatic stress. Journal of Communication Disorders 2005; 38: 231–260
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weintraub S., Mesulam M. M., Kramer L. Disturbances in prosody: A right-hemisphere contribution to language. Archives of Neurology 1981; 38: 742–744
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wingfield A., Lombardi L., Sokol S. Prosodic features and the intelligibility of accelerated speech: Syntactic versus prosodic segmentation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1984; 27: 128–134
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yorkston K. M., Beukelman D. R. Ataxic dysarthria: Treatment sequences based on intelligibility and prosodic considerations. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1981; 46: 398–404
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yorkston K. M., Beukelman D. R. Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech. CC Publications, Tigard, OR 1984
   Google Scholar