Speech Error In “Get Real Giving Thanks With Sam Kim Ep #22 By Dive Studios” Video Podcast

The aim of the study is to describe the speech errors and to find out the causes of the speech errors that occurred in the video podcast Get Real Givingthanks with Sam Kim Ep 22. The researchers collected data using the documentation method and applied qualitative analysis. The data for this research were the utterances from video podcast Get Real Givingthanks with Sam Kim Ep 22. The source of the data was a video between the hosts, Ashley and BM, and the guest, Sam Kim, which was downloaded from the official DIVE Studios YouTube Channel with durations of 46 minutes. The data were described based on the theory of Common Speech Errors by Clark Clark (1977). According to the results, it was shown that Ashley made 9 types of errors totaling 47 errors, but BM made 8 types so he did not made errors in types of stutters totaling 80 errors, and Sam made 9 types totaling 106 errors. For the causes of the speech errors are due to internal and external factors such as nervousness, hesitation, haste, and lacking concentration. The total number of speech errors made by the speakers 233 mistakes. As a result of speech errors, 52 repetitions occurred because it happened the most and Sam did it the most. Filled pause occurred 46 mistakes, both Sam and BM produced the most errors. For Silent pause, 41 mistakes, and all speakers made the error. Interjections occurred 37 mistakes but Ashley made the fewest mistakes. False Starts (unretraceed) occurred 14 mistakes, not only BM did 4 mistakes but Ashley also did 4 mistakes. Corrections occurred 13 mistakes but BM only made 2 mistakes. For Stutters happened 13 mistakes, both Asley and Sam made the most mistakes but BM didn't exist. Slip of the tongue happened 11 mistakes and Ashley only made one mistake. False starts (retraced) occurred 6 mistakes and this is the least common type.

The Effect of Tongue-Tie Release on Speech Articulation and Intelligibility

Objective The relationship between ankyloglossia and speech is controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of tongue-tie release on speech articulation and intelligibility. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted. Pediatric patients (>2 years of age) being referred for speech concerns due to ankyloglossia were assessed by a pediatric otolaryngologist, and speech articulation was formally assessed by a speech language pathologist using the Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation 2 (GFTA-2). Patients then underwent a tongue-tie release procedure in clinic. After 1 month, speech articulation was reassessed with GFTA-2. Audio-recordings of sessions were evaluated by independent reviewers to assess speech intelligibility before and after tongue-tie release. Results Twenty-five participants were included (mean age 3.7 years; 20 boys). The most common speech errors identified were phonological substitutions (80%) and gliding errors (56%). Seven children (28%) had abnormal lingual-alveolar and interdental sounds. Most speech sound errors (87.9%) were age/developmentally appropriate. GFTA-2 standard scores before and after tongue-tie release were 85.61 (SD 9.75) and 87.54 (SD 10.21), respectively, (P=.5). Mean intelligibility scores before and after tongue-tie release were 3.15 (SD .22) and 3.21 (SD .31), respectively, (P=.43). Conclusion The majority of children being referred for speech concerns thought to be due to ankyloglossia had age-appropriate speech errors at presentation. Ankyloglossia was not associated with isolated tongue mobility related speech articulation errors in a consistent manner, and there was no benefit of tongue-tie release in improving speech articulation or intelligibility.

Speech Interference as the Result of a Two-Pronged Negative Influence

The article considers the problem of the interaction of languages in the process of forming a bilingual personality and society. A comparative study of the material, the mother tongue and the studied language, reveals the causes of interference in bilingual speech in a foreign language. Traditionally, the causes of speech interference are determined by the characteristics of a native language, which are not found in the language studied, therefore they negatively affect the process of mastering the second language, which generates speech errors. This is a one-sided approach to understand interference in general and its origins (causes) in particular. The article considers the problem of a two-way approach to understanding the phenomenon of speech interference. Speech interference is a result of the negative influence of both the characteristics of the native language and the characteristics of the language being studied, i.e. it is a simultaneous two-way process in dual unity. Both processes of negative influence on an individuals mastery of a second language are defined as one action in bilinguality, giving the same result - interference in bilingual speech, which is expressed in phonetic-phonological, semantic and other types and types of speech errors. The simultaneous and inconsistent negative influence of the features of the native language and the non-native language considered on the material of consonant combinations in the initial words of the Russian and Kazakh languages, when the absence of combinations of consonants in this position of the Kazakh word and their presence in this position of the Russian word to the same extent and at the same time negatively influence on the correct - the literary pronunciation of Kazakh words and Russian words. Thus, in contrast to the traditional explanation of the phenomenon of speech interference as a result of a one-sided negative process, it is proposed and proved that this phenomenon is the result of (simultaneous) two-way influence of features, native and studied languages. Errors of an individual in speech in a foreign language are considered according to the provisions of the syntagmatic typology of interference (plus segmentation, or minus segmentation).

Speech portrait of O. Mandelstam (On the methodology of philological evaluation of poetic idiolect)

The article develops an algorithm of philological evaluation of a poetic idiolect, determines the components of the language competence of its carrier; on this basis presents the speech portrait of O. Mandelstam in the context of modern Russian poetry. The study shows that the linguistic competence of the poetic idiolect carrier is represented by two components: 1) speech culture competence, the level of which is inversely dependent with respect to the number of a) the orthological ans stylistic mistakes made by them; b) their types and subtypes; 2) elocutive competence, the level of which is determined by the number of stylistic techniques used by them. The evaluation of the speech culture competence is possible on the basis of a general typology of speech errors; for this purpose, a list of typical for modern poetic speech errors and shortcomings is compiled: if these errors and shortcomings regularly appear in the author’s texts, this indicates that he has problems in this area. The proposed test allows to identify poets with impeccable cultural competence and those whose competence leaves much to be desired. The evaluation of the elocutive competence is made on the basis of the general typology of figures (including rhythmic ones) and semantic transfers. One of the most significant criteria for evaluating elocutive competence is an ability to produce new stylistic techniques and speech genres, i. e. its creative component, in this aspect O. Mandelstam appears as a creator of at least two speech genres that have become a familiar attribute of modern Russian poetry: 1) an acromonosyllabic verse with a terminal spondaic caesura; 2) a free dolnik formed through the procedure of secondary verse division.

Predictors of Success After Furlow Palatoplasty for Repair of Cleft Palate: Does Syndrome Matter?

Objective To determine predictors of success following Veau 1 and 2 cleft palate repair in patients with and without syndromes. Study Design Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Setting Tertiary care children’s hospital. Methods All children <18 months of age undergoing Furlow palatoplasty for Veau 1 and 2 cleft repair between 2000 and 2014 with postoperative perceptual speech assessment (PSA). Results In total, 368 consecutive patients were identified; 95 were excluded, resulting in 273 patients. Median age at surgery was 13.0 months (interquartile range [IQR], 11-15 months) with postoperative PSA at a median of 32.3 months (IQR, 26.3-44.5 months). Fifty patients (18.3%) had syndrome diagnosis; 59 patients (21.6%) had nonsyndromic Robin sequence. Velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) occurred in 27 patients (10.5%); 13 underwent secondary speech surgery. Cleft-related speech errors occurred in 46 patients (17.6%). Non-cleft-related speech errors occurred in 155 patients (59.6%) and reduced intelligibility in 127 patients (47.9%). Oronasal fistula occurred in 23 patients (8.8%) and was exclusive to Veau 2 clefts. In multivariate analysis, age >13 months at palatoplasty demonstrated a 6-fold higher rate of VPI (hazard ratio [HR], 6.64; P < .01), worse speech outcomes (HR, 6.04; P < .01; HR, 1.60; P < .01; HR, 1.57; P = .02), and greater speech therapy utilization (HR, 2.18; P < .01). Conclusion VPI occurred in 10% of patients undergoing Furlow palatoplasty repair of Veau 1 or 2 clefts. Age <13 months at palatoplasty was associated with improved speech outcomes and lower VPI incidence (2.8% vs 16.2%). Syndromic diagnosis was associated with noncleft speech errors and reduced intelligibility on univariate analysis but not velopharyngeal function after palatoplasty.

Deficit or Difference? Effects of Altered Auditory Feedback on Speech Fluency and Kinematic Variability in Adults Who Stutter

Purpose The purpose of this study was to test whether adults who stutter (AWS) display a different range of sensitivity to delayed auditory feedback (DAF). Two experiments were conducted to assess the fluency of AWS under long-latency DAF and to test the effect of short-latency DAF on speech kinematic variability in AWS. Method In Experiment 1, 15 AWS performed a conversational speaking task under nonaltered auditory feedback and 250-ms DAF. The rates of stuttering-like disfluencies, other disfluencies, and speech errors and articulation rate were compared. In Experiment 2, 13 AWS and 15 adults who do not stutter (AWNS) read three utterances under four auditory feedback conditions: nonaltered auditory feedback, amplified auditory feedback, 25-ms DAF, and 50-ms DAF. Across-utterance kinematic variability (spatiotemporal index) and within-utterance variability (percent determinism and stability) were compared between groups. Results In Experiment 1, under 250-ms DAF, the rate of stuttering-like disfluencies and speech errors increased significantly, while articulation rate decreased significantly in AWS. In Experiment 2, AWS exhibited higher kinematic variability than AWNS across the feedback conditions. Under 25-ms DAF, the spatiotemporal index of AWS decreased significantly compared to the other feedback conditions. AWS showed lower overall percent determinism than AWNS, but their percent determinism increased under 50-ms DAF to approximate that of AWNS. Conclusions Auditory feedback manipulations can alter speech fluency and kinematic variability in AWS. Longer latency auditory feedback delays induce speech disruptions, while subtle auditory feedback manipulations potentially benefit speech motor control. Both AWS and AWNS are susceptible to auditory feedback during speech production, but AWS appear to exhibit a distinct continuum of sensitivity.

Assistance and Support Provided to International Students by University Teachers

While studying abroad, international students face numerous difficulties, which forces host universities to provide such students with additional assistance and support. However, the issue of activities employed by university teachers to support international students has been understudied. The research was undertaken to identify what activities university teachers used to assist and support international students and what categories of teachers were more likely to provide assistance. The main method was a descriptive survey where a quarter of faculty (N=92) of the Belarusian-Russian University participated. The analysis revealed that the most popular activities to enhance learning outcomes of international students were providing them with easier and simpler assignments, using interactive projector to deliver lectures, and encouraging international students to seek personal guidance. University teachers were also aware of psychological and socio-cultural problems of international students and did their best to create safe classroom environments, demonstrate tolerance to low language proficiency and speech errors, and facilitate intercultural interactions in the classrooms. More active positions in supporting international students were taken by middle career teachers. The study highlights the significance of implementation of support activities in international groups and recommends that host universities organize special training for faculties with significant numbers of international students.

FEATURES OF PREPARATION FOR THE WRITTEN PART OF THE A LEVEL RUSSIAN LANGUAGE EXAM

Статья посвящена особенностям подготовки к экзамену A Level по русскому языку. Основываясь на опыте педагогической деятельности, автор выделяет типичные неречевые и речевые ошибки, встречающиеся при написании экзаменационного эссе, а также приводит пример сочинения, в котором допущены некоторые из указанных ошибок. В статье подчеркивается важность подготовительной работы по снятию лексико-грамматических трудностей, объяснению структуры сочинения, составлению словаря текстов и разъяснению исторических и культурных реалий произведения. Автор предлагает ряд упражнений, позволяющих ученикам избежать морфологических, лексических и синтаксических ошибок на экзамене по русскому языку. The article is devoted to the peculiarities of preparing students for the Russian A Level language exam. Based on the experience of teaching, the author identifies typical non-speech and speech errors that occur when writing an exam essay and also gives an example of a composition in which some of these errors are made. The article emphasizes the importance of preparatory work to remove lexical and grammatical difficulties, explain the structure of the composition, compile a dictionary of texts, and explain the historical and cultural realities of the work. The author offers a number of exercises that allow students to avoid morphological, lexical, and syntactic errors in the Russian language exam.