Thesis (B.Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 2003. / "A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Science (Speech and Hearing Sciences), The University of Hong Kong, April 30, 2003." Includes bibliographical references (p. 29-31) Also available in print.

published_or_final_version / Psychology / Master / Master of Philosophy

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 1999. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 191-199). Available also in a digital version from Dissertation Abstracts.

In the field of child language acquisition, in particular phonological acquisition, many have queried the role played by perception. The present study was undertaken to examine the perception of some speech sounds by children in the process of phonological development. Perception of the group of sounds known as fricatives was examined in a group of subjects aged 3;0 to 4;11. Pairs of nonsense syllables were presented to eight subjects in an AX paradigm. Results were examined for each fricative pair in terms of mean error rate. Some discussion of individual subjects was also included. Results showed that children find it more difficult to discriminate between some pairs of fricatives than others. In particular, the three voiced/voiceless minimal pairs: [sə-zə, ʃə- ʒə, fə-və] were found to be significantly more difficult to discrjurdnate than other pairs of fricatives. Findings were for the most part in agreement with the results of other similar studies. In addition, methodological problems inherent to the nature of the investigation were encountered and discussed. / Medicine, Faculty of / Audiology and Speech Sciences, School of / Graduate

published_or_final_version / abstract / Linguistics / Master / Master of Arts

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, 1980. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND HUMANITIES. / Bibliography: leaves 246-253. / by Janet Breckenridge Pierrehumbert. / Ph.D.

Not available / text

published_or_final_version / abstract / toc / Linguistics / Master / Master of Arts

This study is primarily concerned with the issue of determining whether it is worthwhile to try to teach the correct pronunciation of subphonemic segments in ESL courses. It focuses specifically on the allophones [J, J] produced by the Flapping (or Tapping) of medial and final alveolar stops in North American English. Through an exhaustive examination of the ESL and TESL pronunciation manuals that have been published in the last thirty years or so, an assessment is first made of the manner and extent to which this widespread phonological process has been dealt with by the authors of such books. These findings are then compared with the opinions expressed by researchers in the field of second language education in order to determine what sort of consensus currently exists on this issue. The general conclusion is that since flaps are demonstrably the most salient of all NAE allophones and occur as phonemes in the first language of many ESL learners, these segments should be given due consideration in any pronunciation curriculum.

In articulation treatment and diagnosis, it is essential to possess a thorough knowledge of what is “normal” as well as what is “defective” articulation. The /r/ phoneme is one of the most frequently occurring and most commonly defective sounds. There are two different tongue positions for the /r/ phoneme described in the literature (retroflex and central hump), with many assumptions about which tongue position is “normal” or “most common.” None of these assumptions, however, are based on empirical data. The purpose of this study was to provide some normative data regarding which of the two tongue positions is most common in children who have learned to produce the /r/ phoneme normally with no clinical assistance. Six research questions were posed: (1) Do children produce the /r/ phoneme more commonly with retroflex or central hump tongue position? (2) Are there sex-related differences? (3) Are there differences in tongue position when the /r/ is used as a consonant or vowel? (4) Are there differences in tongue position when the vocalic \r\ is stressed or un-stressed? (5) Are there differences in tongue position relating to the position of the /r/ phoneme within a syllable? (6) Does phonetic context affect the tongue position of the /r/ phoneme?