A new technique for evaluating hypernasality using an acoustic approach is presented. In a preliminary study using this technique, nasal resonance was assessed in 17 normal subjects and 16 subjects judged to be hypernasal. Analyses of the one-third-octave power spectra revealed an increase in power level between the first and second formant, and a reduction in the power level in second and third formant regions among utterances judged to be hypernasal. Factor analysis of the perceptual ratings revealed that the consensus perception of hypernasality accounted for 71% of the total variance. An additional 8% was accounted for by individual differences. Multiple regression analysis revealed a high correlation between the consensus perception of hypernasality and the variance in two acoustic-power levels, these being the power level between the first and second formant and the power level of the second and third formant regions.
BradfordL.J., BrooksA.R., SheltonR.L.Clinical judgement of hypernasality in cleft palate children.Cleft Palate J1964; 1: 329–335.
2.
BzochK.R.Measurement and assessment of categorical aspects of cleft palate language, voice, and speech disorders. In: BzochK.R., ed. Communicative disorders related to cleft lip and palate.Boston: Little, Brown, 1989: 138–146.
3.
CounihanD.T., CullinanW.L.Reliability and dispersion of nasality ratings.Cleft Palate J1970; 7: 261–270.
4.
DalstonR.M.Photodetector assessment of velopharyngeal activity.Cleft Palate J1982; 19: 1–8.
5.
DalstonR.M.Using simultaneous photodetection and nasometry to monitor velopharyngeal behavior during speech.J Speech Hear Res1989; 32: 195–202.
6.
D'AntonioL.L., MarshJ.L., ProvinceM.A., MuntzH.R., PhillipsC.J.Reliability of flexible fiberoptic nasopharyngoscopy for evaluation of velopharyngeal function in a clinical population.Cleft Palate J1989; 26: 217–225.
7.
DicksonDr.An acoustic study of nasality.J Speech Hear Res1962; 5: 103–111.
8.
EricssonG.Analysis and treatment of cleft palate speech: some acoustic-phonetic observations. Linköping.Sweden: Linköping University Medical Dissertations No. 254, 1987.
9.
FantG.Nasal sound and nasalization. In: FantG., ed. Acoustic theory of speech production.Hague: Mouton, 1970: 148–161.
10.
FletcherS.G.“Nasalance” vs. listener judgements of nasality.Cleft Palate J1976; 13: 31–44.
11.
FornerL.L.Speech segment durations produced by five and six year old speakers with and without cleft palates.Cleft Palate J1983; 20: 185–198.
12.
HoriiY.An accelerometric measure as a physical correlate of perceived hypernasality in speech.J Speech Hear Res1983; 26: 476–480.
13.
HouseA.S., StevensK.N.Analog studies of the nasalization of vowels.J Speech Hear Disord1956; 21: 218–232.
14.
KarlingJ., LohmanderA., de Serpa-LeitaoA., GalyasK., LarsonO.NORAM: calibration and operational advice for measuring nasality in cleft palate patients.Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg1985; 19: 261–267.
15.
KataokaR.Quantitative evaluation of hypernasality — Relation between spectral characteristics and perception of hypernasality.J Japanese Cleft Palate Association1988; 13: 204–216 (in Japanese).
16.
KentR.D., LissJ.M., PhilipsB.J.Acoustic analysis of velopharyngeal dysfunction in speech. In: BzochK.R., ed. Communicative disorders related to cleft lip and palate.Boston: Little, Brown, 1989: 258–270.
17.
KimJ., MuellerC.W.Introduction to factor analysis.Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1985.
18.
MaedaS.Acoustics of vowel nasalization and articulatory shifts in French nasal vowels. In: HuffmanM.K., KrakowR.A. eds. Phonetics and phonology. Nasals, nasalization, and the velum. 5.San Diego: Academic Press, 1993: 147–167.
19.
McWilliamsB.J., MusgraveR.H., GrozierP.A.The influence of head position upon velopharyngeal closure.Cleft Palate J1968; 5: 117–124.
20.
NellisJ.L., NeimanG.S., LehmanJ.A.Comparison of nasometer and listener judgments of nasality in the assessment of velopharyngeal function after pharyngeal flap surgery.Cleft Palate Craniofac J1992; 29: 157–163.
21.
PhilipsB.J., KentR.D.Acoustic-phonetic descriptions of speech production in speakers with cleft palate and other velopharyngeal disorders. In: LassN.J., ed. Speech and language: advances in basic research and practice, Orlando: Academic Press, 1984: 132–160.
22.
PolsL.C.W., van der KampL.J.Th., PlompR.Perceptual and physical space of vowel sounds.J Acoust Soc Am1969; 46: 458–467.
23.
RedenbaughM.A., ReichA.R.Correspondence between an accelerometric nasal/voice amplitude ratio and listeners' direct magnitude estimations of hypernasality.J Speech Hear Res1985; 28: 273–281.
24.
SchroederM.R., GottlobD., SiebrasseK.F.Comparative study of European concert halls: correlation of subjective preference with geometric and acoustic parameters.J Acoust Soc Am1974; 56: 1195–1201.
25.
SchwartzM.F.Acoustic measures of nasalization and nasality. In: GrabbW.C., RosensteinS.W., BzochK.R. eds. Cleft lip and palate.Boston: Little, Brown, 1971: 798–804,
26.
ShprintzenR.J.Nasopharyngoscopy. In: BzochK.R., ed. Communicative disorders related to cleft lip and palate, Boston: Little, Brown, 1989: 211–229.
27.
SkolnickM.L.Video velopharyngography in patients with nasal speech, with emphasis on lateral pharyngeal motion in velopharyngeal closure.Radiology1969; 93: 747–755.
28.
SmithS.Vocalization and added nasal resonance.Folia Phoniatr1951; 3: 165–169.
29.
SubtelnyJ.Roentogenography applied to the study of speech. In: PruzanskyS., ed. Congenital anomalies of the face and associated structures.Springfield: CC Thomas.1961: 309–326.
30.
WarrenD.W., DuboisA.B.A pressure-flow technique for measuring velopharyngeal orifice area during continuous speech.Cleft Palate J1964; 1: 52–71.
31.
WarrenD.W., DalstonR.M., MorrK.E., HairfieldW.M., SmithL.R.The speech regulating system: temporal and aerodynamic responses to velopharyngeal inadequacy.J Speech Hear Res1989; 32: 566–575.
32.
ZimmermanG., DalstonR.M., BrownC., FolkinsJ.W., LinvilleR.N., SlaverE.J.Comparison of cineradiographic and photodetection techniques for assessing velopharyngeal function during speech.J Speech Hear Res1987; 30: 564–569.
