Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, Katarzyna

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.205

CiteScore 2016: 0.28

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.190
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.505

Online
ISSN
1897-7499
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 52, Issue 4 (Nov 2016)

Issues

Entropy as a measure of mixedupness of realizations in child speech

Elena Babatsouli / David Ingram / Dimitrios A. Sotiropoulos
Published Online: 2016-11-16 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0024

Abstract

Typical morpho-phonological measures of children’s speech realizations used in the literature depend linearly on their components. Examples are the proportion of consonants correct, the mean length of utterance and the phonological mean length of utterance. Because of their linear dependence on their components, these measures change in proportion to their component changes between speech realizations. However, there are instances in which variable speech realizations need to be differentiated better. Therefore, a measure which is more sensitive to its components than linear measures is needed. Here, entropy is proposed as such a measure. The sensitivity of entropy is compared analytically to that of linear measures, deriving ranges in component values inside which entropy is guaranteed to be more sensitive than the linear measures. The analysis is complemented by computing the entropy in two children’s English speech for different categories of word complexity and comparing its sensitivity to that of linear measures. One of the children is a bilingual typically developing child at age 3;0 and the other child is a monolingual child with speech sound disorders at age 5;11. The analysis and applications demonstrate the usefulness of the measure for evaluating speech realizations and its relative advantages over linear measures.

Keywords: Entropy; measure; errors; speech; phonology

References

  • Babatsouli, E. 2016. “Added syllable complexity in a child’s developmental speech and clinical implications”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 1464–5076. (doi:).CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Babatsouli, E. 2015. “Technologies for the study of speech: Review and an application” [Special Issue on Language Disorders and ICT]. Themes in Science and Technology Education 8(1). 17–32.Google Scholar

  • Babatsouli, E., D. Ingram and D. Sotiropoulos. 2014. “Phonological word proximity in child speech development”. Chaotic Modeling and Simulation. 4(3). 295–313.Google Scholar

  • Brown, R. 1973. A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Bunta, F., L. Fabiano-Smith, B.A. Goldstein and D. Ingram. 2009. “Phonological whole-word measures in three-year-old bilingual children and their age-matched monolingual peers”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics. 23. 156–175.Google Scholar

  • Burrows, L. and B.A. Goldstein. 2010. “Whole word measures in bilingual children with speech sound disorders”. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics. 24. 357–368.Google Scholar

  • Goldsmith, J. 2000. “On information theory, entropy, and phonology in the 20th century”. Folia Linguistica XXXIV(1–2). 85–100.Google Scholar

  • Ingram, D. 1981. Procedures for the phonological analysis of children’s language. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar

  • Ingram, D. 2002. “The measurement of whole-word production”. Journal of Child Language. 29. 713–733.Google Scholar

  • Ingram, D. 2015. “Whole-word measures: Using the pCC-PWP intersect to distinguish speech delay from speech disorder”. In: Bowen, C. (ed.), Children’s speech sound disorders (2nd edition). Oxford, UK: John Willey & Sons. 100– 104.Google Scholar

  • Ingram, D. and K. Ingram. 2001. “A whole-word approach to phonological analysis and intervention”. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools. 32. 271– 283.Google Scholar

  • Ingram, D., L. Williams and N. J. Scherer. 2015. “Are speech sound disorders phonological or articulatory? A spectrum approach”. In E. Babatsouli and D. Ingram (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Monolingual and Bilingual Speech 2015. ISBN 978-618-82351-0-6. Retrieved at www.ismbs.eu/publications. 98–104.

  • Macleod, A.A., K. Laukys and S. Rvachew. 2011. “The impact of bilingual language learning on whole-word complexity and segmental accuracy among children aged 18 and 36 months”. International Journal of Speech and Language Pathology. 13. 490–499.Google Scholar

  • MacWhinney, B. 2000. The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

  • Nespor, M., M. Peña and J. Mehler. 2003. “On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition”. Lingue e Linguaggio. 2. 203–229.Google Scholar

  • Nice, M. M. 1925. “Length of sentences as a criterion of a child’s progress in speech”. Journal of Educational Psychology. 16. 370–379.Google Scholar

  • Parker, M.D. and K. Brorson. 2005. “A comparative study between mean length of utterance in morphemes (MLUm) and mean length of utterance in words (MLUw)”. First Language. 25. 365–376.Google Scholar

  • Schmitt, L.S., B.H. Howard and J.F Schmitt. 1983. “Conversational speech sampling in the assessment of articulation proficiency”. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. 14. 210–214.Google Scholar

  • Shriberg, L., D. Austin, B. Lewis, J. McSweeney and D. Wilson. 1997. “The percentage of consonants correct (PCC) metric: Extensions and reliability data”. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 3. 708–722.Google Scholar

  • Shannon, C.E. 1948a. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal. 27(3). 379–423.Google Scholar

  • Shannon, C.E. 1948b. “A mathematical theory of communication”. Bell System Technical Journal. 27(4). 623–656.Google Scholar

  • Taelman, H., G. Durieux and S. Gillis. 2005. “Notes on Ingram’s whole-word measures for phonological development”. Journal of Child Language. 32. 391– 400.Google Scholar

About the article

Institute of Monolingual and Bilingual Speech, Kalathas Akrotiriou, Chania, 73100, Greece


Published Online: 2016-11-16

Published in Print: 2016-11-01


Citation Information: Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, ISSN (Online) 1897-7499, ISSN (Print) 0137-2459, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0024.

Export Citation

© Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in