Departments of Head and Neck Surgery and Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095-1794, USA.
J Acoust Soc Am. 2024 Feb 1;155(2):1264-1271. doi: 10.1121/10.0024609.
The problem of characterizing voice quality has long caused debate and frustration. The richness of the available descriptive vocabulary is overwhelming, but the density and complexity of the information voices convey lead some to conclude that language can never adequately specify what we hear. Others argue that terminology lacks an empirical basis, so that language-based scales are inadequate a priori. Efforts to provide meaningful instrumental characterizations have also had limited success. Such measures may capture sound patterns but cannot at present explain what characteristics, intentions, or identity listeners attribute to the speaker based on those patterns. However, some terms continually reappear across studies. These terms align with acoustic dimensions accounting for variance across speakers and languages and correlate with size and arousal across species. This suggests that labels for quality rest on a bedrock of biology: We have evolved to perceive voices in terms of size/arousal, and these factors structure both voice acoustics and descriptive language. Such linkages could help integrate studies of signals and their meaning, producing a truly interdisciplinary approach to the study of voice.
长期以来,语音质量的特征描述问题一直存在争议并令人沮丧。现有的描述性词汇非常丰富,但语音所传达的信息密度和复杂性使得一些人得出结论,即语言永远无法充分指定我们所听到的内容。另一些人则认为术语缺乏经验基础,因此基于语言的量表事先就不够充分。提供有意义的仪器特征描述的努力也收效甚微。这些措施可以捕捉声音模式,但目前无法解释听众根据这些模式赋予说话者的特征、意图或身份。然而,一些术语在研究中反复出现。这些术语与跨说话者和语言的变异性的声学维度一致,并与跨物种的大小和唤醒度相关。这表明,质量标签基于生物学的基石:我们已经进化为根据大小/唤醒度来感知声音,这些因素构建了声音的声学特性和描述性语言。这种联系可以帮助整合信号及其意义的研究,为声音研究带来真正的跨学科方法。