the identification of tone in chinese hearing-impaired and hearing-normal children
DESCRIPTION
The Identification of Tone in Chinese Hearing-Impaired and Hearing-Normal Children. Jing-Ni Ou Graduate Institute of Linguistics National Taiwan University. Spoken word recognition process. The cohort model (Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, 1980; Marslen-Wilson & Welsh, 1978) - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
The Identification of Tone in Chinese Hearing-
Impaired and Hearing-Normal Children
Jing-Ni Ou
Graduate Institute of Linguistics
National Taiwan University
2
Spoken word recognition process
The cohort model (Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, 1980; Marslen-Wilson & Welsh, 1978)
Hearing-impaired listeners (Schum & Collins, 1990)
3
The Mandarin tone Four lexical tones
Sample Tone Description Pitch (Chao, 1968)
Pitch(Feng, 1997)
ma ‘mother’ 1st Tone high-level 55 44
ma ‘hemp’ 2nd Tone mid-rising 35 323
ma ‘horse’ 3rd Tone mid-falling-rising 214 312
ma ‘reproach’ 4th Tone high-falling 51 42
4
The Mandarin tone Tonal coarticulation (e,g., Shen,1990; Xu, 19
94, 1997; Peng, 1997) Perseveratory effects Anticipatory effects
Cues to tone perception (e.g., Gandour, 1983; Lin & Repp, 1989) F0 height vs. F0 movement
Acquisition of tone (e.g., Li & Thompson, 1977; Chen, 1986)
5
Purposes of this study
Investigating the identification of tone in hearing-normal and hearing-impaired children through the time course of tone perception in Mandarin Chinese.
6
Research questions: Q1. How much amount of acoustic-phonetic
information do the four tones need to be identified? What is the difference between monosyllabic words and disyllabic words?
Q2. Given that hearing-impaired children have limited language capacity, what’s the influence of lexical support on perceiving disyllabic words?
Q3. What is the relative importance of F0 height and F0 movement as cues to tone perception?
7
Design of the study The Gating Paradigm (Grosjean, 1980)
Presenting a spoken language stimulus repeatedly and increasing its presentation time at each successive passMonosyllable “chuan”
Gate 1 50 msec Gate 2 100 msec Gate 3 150 msec
Disyllable “yan jing”
Gate 1 50 msec Gate 2 100 msec
Gate 3 etc.
150 msec
8
Design of the study
Group Adult Hearing-normal child
Hearing-impaired child
Mean age 20 4;11 6;0
Number 14 30 19
Adjustments
Procedure Writing down the target word
Four-choice pictures
Four-choice pictures
Presentation time
50 msec 50 msec 100 msec
Number of speech materials
M: 20D: 12
M: 20D: 12
M: 8D: 8
9
Experimental Study I- The Adult Group Subjects
14 Adults Materials:
Monosyllabic words: 20 items in total Disyllabic words: 12 items in total Presentation time: 50 msec
Procedure: Writing down the word and confidence rate after e
ach gate within each word
10
Experimental Study II- The Child Group 30 Hearing-normal child group (4;11)
Materials: Monosyllabic words: 20 items in total Disyllabic words: 12 items in total Presentation time: 50 msec
19 Hearing-impaired child group (6;0) Materials:
Monosyllabic words: 8 items in total Disyllabic words: 8 items in total Presentation time: 100 msec
Procedure Pointing to a four-choice picture that represents the mea
ning of the following word after each gate within each word
11
shan shui
shu shu
12
Data Analysis Accuracy rate Activation point (Grosjean & Gee, 1987)
Correctly guessing the stimulus word regardless of whether he/she changed to an incorrect guess subsequently
Isolation point (Grosjean, 1980) Correctly guessing the stimulus word and not changing his/ her
guess subsequently Excluding the responses that failed to isolate or recognize the s
timulus word in the end Gain: (MT-DT)/ DT Error analysis
13
Result- Accuracy Rate
00.20.40.60.8
11.2
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4
Prop
ortion
of ac
curac
y rate
monosyllabicwords
disyllabic words
00.20.40.60.8
11.2
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4
Prop
ortion
of ac
curac
y rate
monosyllabicwords
disyllabic words
00.20.40.60.8
11.2
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4
Prop
ortion
of ac
curac
y rate
monosyllabicwords
disyllabic words
Adults Hearing-Normal Children Hearing- Impaired Children
14
Result- Accuracy Rate
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4
Prop
ortio
n of
acc
urac
y ra
te
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4Pro
portio
n of
acc
urac
y ra
te
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
Monosyllabic words Disyllabic words
15
The Time Course of Tone Perception
GATE
10987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f co
rre
ct id
en
tific
atio
n
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
Tone1
Tone2
Tone3
Tone4
GATE
87654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f co
rre
ct id
en
tific
atio
n
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
Tone1
Tone2
Tone3
Tone4
GATE
87654321
pro
po
rtio
n o
f co
rre
ct id
en
tific
atio
n
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
TONE4
Monosyllabic words
Disyllabic words
Adults
10987654321
pro
po
rtio
n o
f co
rre
ct id
en
tific
atio
n
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
TONE4
GATE
987654321
Pro
port
ion
of c
orre
ct id
entif
icat
ion
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
TONE4
GATE
87654321
Pro
port
ion
of c
orre
ct id
entif
icat
ion
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
TONE4
Hearing-Normal Children
Hearing- Impaired Children
16
The Amount of Information
Hearing Normal Children
Hearing Impaired Children
Adults
Dark area: monosyllabic words
Light area: disyllabic words
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
monosyllable
disyllable
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
monosyllable
disyllable
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
monosyllable
disyllable
17
The Amount of InformationMonosyllabic words Disyllabic words
Adult group T1< T4< T3< T2 T1< T3, T4
HN child group
T1< T4< T3< T2 T1< T2, T4< T3
HI child group
T1, T4< T2T4< T3
T1, T2, T4< T3
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
group
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
group
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
Monosyllabic words
Disyllabic words
18
Gain in the disyllabic word
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Tone 1 Tone 2 Tone 3 Tone 4
Mea
n of
gai
n
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
Gain in disyllabic words
Adult group T1, T4, T3< T2
HN child group T3< T1, T4< T2
HI child group T3, T4, T1< T2
19
Q2 : (1) lexical support (r = -.216, p > .05)
Target Number of candidates Recognition point(Mean gate in three groups)
gong + j < gongji > 14 1.30
hei + b < heiban > 4 1.63
hua + m < huamao > 7 1.29
biao + g < biaoge > 2 2.98
xiao + h < xiaohu > 8 1.67
ba + sh < bashi> 2 1.23
bai + (y)i < baiyi> 8 3.22
lu + (y)i < luying > 3 2.18
song + sh < songshu > 3 1.17
yan + j < yanjing > 9 1.56
chang + b < changbi > 4 1.26
da + j < dajiao > 15 1.19
20
Q2 : (2) tonal coarticulation cues
1-1 1-2
1-3 1-4
21
Tonal combination 1-1 (3) 1-2 (7) 1-3 (4) 1-4 (3)
Pitch height (Hz)
Starting point 272.87 273.63 279.33 270.07
2nd gate 255.53 217.39 188.88 245.4
Pitch contour level falling falling rising-falling
Tonal combination 2-1 (1) 2-2 (3) 2-3 (1) 2-4 (2)
Pitch height (Hz)
Starting point 206.2 226.4 215.5 199.9
2nd gate 256.7 209.7 251.4 251.75
Pitch contour rising rising-falling
rising rising-falling
Tonal combination 3-1 (3) 3-2 (2) 3-3 (2) 3-4 (3)
Pitch height (Hz)
Starting point 239.23 250.85 229.8 224.83
2nd gate 260.77 201.95 215.35 242.77
Pitch contour falling-rising
falling falling-rising
falling-rising-falling
Tonal combination 4-1 (0) 4-2 (1) 4-3 (2) 4-4 (1)
Pitch height (Hz)
Starting point 329.3 310.75 292.7
2nd gate 202.1 211.6 238.1
Pitch contour falling falling falling-rising-falling
22
Q3: Error AnalysisMajor error
Target
Adults HN child group HI child group
Tone 1 T4 T4 T4
Tone 2 T1 T1, T3 T1, T3
Tone 3 T4 T4 T4
Tone 4 T1 T1 T1
GATE
10987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
TONE4
other
GATE
10987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE2
TONE1
TONE3
TONE4
other
GATE
87654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE3
TONE1
TONE2
TONE4
other
GATE
654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
TONE4
TONE1
TONE2
TONE3
other
Adults
T1 T2 T3 T4
23
Q3: Error Analysis
gate
10987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone1
tone4
other
gate
10987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone2
tone3
other
gate
87654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone3
tone2
other
gate
654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone4
tone1
other
GATE
87654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone1
tone4
other
GATE
987654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone2
tone3
other
GATE
87654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone3
tone2
other
GATE
654321
Pro
po
rtio
n o
f to
ne
jud
gm
en
ts
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
tone4
tone1
other
T1 T2 T3 T4
HN child
HI child
24
Q3: F0 height vs. F0 movement
150
250
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
gate
pitc
h(H
z)
tone1tone2tone3tone4
HN HI
HN
HI
HN
HIHN
HI
Tone4
(270.8 ms)
Tone3
(355.6 ms)
Tone1
(424.6 ms)
Tone2
(464 ms)
A
A
A
A
25
Conclusion-Q1: amount of information
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
group
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
tone
tone4tone3tone2tone1
Me
an
pro
po
rtio
n
1.0
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
group
hearing normal
hearing impaired
adult
Monosyllabic words Disyllabic words
T1 & T4 < ½ syllable
T2 & T3 > ½ syllable
T1, T2, T3, T4 < ½ syllable
26
Tonal coarticulation cues > lexical support
HI child group: Different perceptual weights Having problems in handling pitch
pattern that changes rapidly over time
Conclusion- Q2
27
F0 height vs. F0 movement F0 movement is a more stable cue than
F0 height to the tonal distinctions of Mandarin.
Conclusion- Q3