Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.22683/tsnr.2019.8.3.069

Characteristics of Right Hemispheric Damaged Patients in Korean Focused Prosodic Sentences  

Lee, Myung Soon (Dept. of Speech Therapy, Sangjiyoungseu College)
Park, Hyun (Dept. of Speech Therapy, Sangjiyoungseu College)
Publication Information
Therapeutic Science for Rehabilitation / v.8, no.3, 2019 , pp. 69-81 More about this Journal
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.
Keywords
F0; Focus; Prosody; RHD;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
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   DOI
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   DOI
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.   DOI
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   DOI
18 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   DOI
19 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   DOI
20 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.
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   DOI
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   DOI
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   DOI