La Pointe L L, Johns D F
Audiology and Speech Pathology, Veterans Administration Hospital, Gainesville, Florida 32602.
J Commun Disord. 1975 Sep;8(3):259-69. doi: 10.1016/0021-9924(75)90018-0.
The articulatory performance of 13 left hemisphere-damaged adults who presented apraxia of speech was tabulated on confusion matrices and analyzed according to error pattern. Consonants were more susceptible to error than were vowels, as were consonant clusters when compared to single consonants. No significant differences existed among error percentages for the initial, medial, and final positions. When errors were analyzed according to manner of production, affricatives and fricatives were significantly more susceptible to error than all others. Analysis of errors according to place of production revealed lingua alveolar and bilabial phonemes to be significantly less impaired than all other categories. No differences were found in error percentages of voiced and unvoiced phonemes. The sequential nature of substitution errors was further analyzed by tallying and classifying errors as anticipatory (prepositioning), reiterative (postpositioning), or metathesis. Seven percent of the substitution errors in this study were sequential, with anticipatory errors outnumbering reiterative errors by a ratio of 6 to 1. Feature analysis of substitutions to determine distance from the target sound revealed that 38% of the substitutions were defective in two or more features. Some of these subjectively bore little resemblance to the target sound.
对13名出现言语失用症的左半球损伤成人的发音表现进行了整理，列于混淆矩阵中，并根据错误模式进行分析。辅音比元音更容易出错，辅音连缀与单个辅音相比也是如此。词首、词中及词末位置的错误百分比之间不存在显著差异。根据发音方式分析错误时，塞擦音和擦音比其他所有音更易出错。根据发音部位分析错误时，发现齿龈音和双唇音的受损程度明显低于所有其他类别。浊音和清音的错误百分比没有差异。通过对错误进行计数并将错误分类为预期性（前置）、重复性（后置）或换位性，进一步分析了替代错误的顺序性质。本研究中7%的替代错误是顺序性的，预期性错误与重复性错误的比例为6比1。对替代音进行特征分析以确定与目标音的距离，结果显示38%的替代音在两个或更多特征上存在缺陷。其中一些在主观上与目标音几乎没有相似之处。
