Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Selected characteristics were compared in the speech of five tracheoesophageal, five esophageal, and 15 normal laryngeal adult speakers. Tape-recorded speech samples were measured for durational features with a stopwatch. Frequency features were analyzed with a Visi-Pitch/Apple IIE computer interface with statistical subroutines. Tracheoesophageal speech proved comparable to normal speech in maximum phonation time, speech rate, pitch pertubation (jitter), average fundamental frequency, and fundamental frequency range, but less efficient than normal speech in phrase grouping. Tracheoesophageal speech was superior to esophageal speech in maximum phonation time, speech rate, and phrase grouping, but not significantly different in pitch perturbation, average fundamental frequency, and fundamental frequency range. Explanations and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Keywords

esophageal speech laryngectomee speech therapy tracheoesophageal speech

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Robbins

Fisher

Logemann

Hillenbrand

Blom

. A comparative acoustic analysis of laryngeal speech, esophageal speech, and speech production after tracheoesophageal puncture. Presented at the meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Los Angeles, Nov 20–23, 1981.

Robbins

. Acoustic differentiation of laryngeal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech. J Speech Hear Res 1984; 27: 577–85.

Robbins

Fisher

Blom

Singer

. Selected acoustic features of tracheoesophageal, esophageal, and laryngeal speech. Arch Otolaryngol 1984; 110: 670–2.

Robbins

Fisher

Blom

Singer

. A comparative acoustic study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech production. J Speech Hear Disord 1984; 49: 202–10.

Snidecor

Curry

. How effectively can the laryngectomee expect to speak?. Laryngoscope 1960; 70: 62–7.

Weinberg

Bennett

. Selected acoustic characteristics of esophageal speech produced by female laryngectomees. J Speech Hear Res 1972; 15: 211–6.

Filter

Hyman

. Relationship of acoustic parameters and perceptual ratings of esophageal speech. Percept Mot Skills 1975; 40: 63–8.

Gandour

Weinberg

. Perception of intonational contrasts in alaryngeal speech. J Speech Hear Res 1983; 26: 142–8.

Black

Haggen

. Multiple-choice intelligibility tests, forms A and B. J Speech Hear Disord 1963; 28: 77–86.

10.

Koike

. Application of some acoustic measures for the evaluation of laryngeal dysfunction. Stud Phonolog 1973; 7: 17–23.

11.

Horii

. Vocal shimmer in sustained phonation. J Speech Hear Res 1980; 23: 202–9.

12.

Shipp

. Frequency, duration, and perceptual measures in relation to judgments of alaryngeal speech acceptability. J Speech Hear Res 1967; 10: 417–27.

13.

Costello

. Speech disorders in adults. San Diego: College-Hill Press, 1985.

14.

Horii

. Jitter and shimmer differences among sustained vowel phonations. J Speech Hear Res 1982; 25: 12–4.

15.

Steinsapir

Forner

Stemple

. Comparison of data from the Visi-Pitch and the PM300 Pitch Analyzer. Presented at the meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Detroit, Nov 21–24, 1986.

16.

Fitch

Holbrook

. Modal vocal fundamental frequency of young adults. Arch Otolaryngol 1970; 92: 379–82.

Duration and Frequency Characteristics of Tracheoesophageal Speech

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References