Phonological Development in Children with Cleft Palate by hcj


									 Phonological Development
in Children with Cleft Palate
     Virginia Dixon-Wood, MA
        University of Florida
   Phonological Development
• Young children are active problem solvers
  who are attempting to produce speech that
  sounds like the speech they hear

                   Broen, P. and K. Moeller
      in Cleft Palate – Interdisciplinary Issue and Treatment
  Phonological Development
         Process is cognitive
Child is actively experimenting to match
the visual and acoustic attributes of
              avoiding words
             modifying features
       assimilating place or manner
  Phonological Development
 The accuracy of speech is constrained by
the child’s perception of what is to be
produced and the child’s physical ability to
produce what is perceived
Impaired by:
               hearing loss
               palatal fistula
  Phonological Development
Children with cleft palate don’t
compensate like other children. Their
productions do not seem to be reasonable
approximations of the speech to which
they are exposed
Some make errors that cannot be
accounted for by the difference in their oral
mechanism, i.e. glottal articulation
   Phonological Development
• These children accommodate in 3 ways:

 1)Nasal emission distortion with
 appropriate sounds
          high pressure
             /p, b, s/
 Phonological Development

2)Substitutes a sound which the child can
produce that matches some of the
             /n/ for /d/
 Phonological Development

 3)Glottal/pharyngeal substitution which
also can keep some features, i.e.

     glottal stop for oral stop
   Phonological Development
2 Common Patterns
Described by Ferguson and Farrell:
Child 1
Used words with sounds they were able to
  produce-75% sonorant
Single syllable words-75% of the time
As vocabulary increases, however, speech
  becomes less accurate
  Phonological Development
Child 2
Used words that they were unable to
 produce – 25% sonorant
50% of words were multisyllabic
Productions were not very accurate
    Phonological Development
 Differences among children w/o cleft palate
 and each other

Child 1
Did not begin talking until age 2
Conservative approach
   Phonological Development

• Child 2
  Talked with open palate
  Word initial consonants accurate 30% of
  the time
  Developed template-used it for several
  Phonological Development
Child 2

Unlike normal children, used
      -back velar stops
      -pharyngeal fricatives
      -glottal stops
 Phonological Development
 Broen 1986

30 month old children
3 groups of 5 children each
   cleft palate w/o vpi
  Phonological Development
Broen, 1986

Cleft palate group w/o VPI
 -Were still slower at acquiring
normal/accurate speech production
  Phonological Development
 Broen, 1986
 Vpi group-more voicing errors
 place errors-fewer (more evenly
*most significant-frequency with which
 sonorants were substituted for
 non-sonorants (22.0, 2.0, 0.2)
  Phonological Development
VPI group

a)Preserving voice but sacrificing place
  - nasal stops for voiced nasal stops
   -non-voiced (h/p)
  Phonological Development

b)Neutralizing voice but preserving place-

 Nasals or voiced glides for non-sonorant
consonants, i.e. l/d
   Phonological Development
 c)Some children used 2-3 different
 consonants as substitution for one
 phoneme /y,h/

Trade-offs necessary to produce audible
  speech that approximates target
   Phonological Development
“Early Speech Production of Children with
             Cleft Palate”
   Teresa Estrem and Patricia Broen
             JSHR 1989
What’s the role of physiology in shaping
 early lexical choice?
  Phonological Development
Lexical choice

-10 children / 2 groups
-cleft palate/ non-cleft
-analyzed speech at 10, 20, 30, 40, 50
 word levels
Lexical Choice - results
 Cleft group:
 1)Difference in class features – more
 2)Very young children tended to target
 words with sounds with less intraoral
   Phonological Development
• Lexical Choice-results
  3)Place of articulation-more labials and
  4)Manner of production –
      -produced fewer stops than targeted
      -targeted more words with nasal and
     -produced more than targeted
Phonological Development

 Lack of VP closure does not
   “cause” glottal stops or
     pharyngeal fricatives
Phonological Development

  As vocabulary increases
   Intelligibility decreases
   Phonological Development
Post operative characteristics:
 Active vs. Passive
  Nasal emission- can be active or passive
  Passive- goes away with surgery
  Active – stays as a feature of the child’s
             speech development

To top