Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:31:36.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development of speech-like vocalizations in a child with congenital absence of cochleas: The case of total deafness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Michael P. Lynch ,
D. Kimbrough Oller  and
Michele Steffens
Michael P. Lynch*
Affiliation:
University of Miami
D. Kimbrough Oller
Affiliation:
University of Miami
Michele Steffens
Affiliation:
University of Miami
*
Michael P. Lynch, Departments of Psychology and Pediatrics, University of Miami, Mailman Center for Child Development, P.O. Box 016820 (D-820), Miami, FL 33101
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to assess the effect of total deafness on vocalization development, tape recorded utterances of a 3-year-old child who was born without cochleas were examined. In the beginning of the study, the subject's speech consisted almost exclusively of small numbers of sounds characteristic of early infancy. Across the study, the subject participated in extensive vocal stimulation activities. He also initially received intermittent exposure to tactile speech information via a 16-channel vocoder and, subsequently, a 2-channel tactile aid. Following introduction of the 2-channel aid, the subject made rapid improvement in the quality of his vocalizations, which consisted increasingly of speech-like utterances, including well-formed or canonical syllables. These results suggest that, although hearing impairment slows the onset of canonical babbling, even total deafness does not preclude its eventual appearance.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 315 - 333
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berry, W. (1966). Form in music. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Brooks, P. L., Frost, B. J., Mason, J. L., & Gibson, D. M. (1986a). Continuing evaluation of the Queen's University tactile vocoder. I: Identification of open set words. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 23(1), 119–128.Google ScholarPubMed
Brooks, P. L., Frost, B. J., Mason, J. L., & Gibson, D. M. (1986b). Continuing evaluation of the Queen's University tactile vocoder. II: Identification of open set sentences and tracking narrative. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 25(1), 129–138.Google Scholar
Erber, N. P. (1974). Visual perception of speech by deaf children: Recent developments and continuing needs. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 39, 178–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, D. (1986). Tactaid II. Somerville, MA: Audiological Engineering.Google Scholar
Fry, D. B. (1966). The development of the phonological system in the normal and the deaf child. In Smith, F. and Miller, G. A. (Eds.), The genesis of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gault, R. H. (1924). Progress in experiments on tactile interpretation of oral speech. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 19, 155–159.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D., Osberger, M. J., Netsell, R., & Hustedde, C. G. (1987). Phonetic development in identical twins who differ in auditory function. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 52, 64–75.Google Scholar
King, A. P., & West, M. J. (1983). Epigenesis of cowbird song – A joint endeavor of males and females. Nature, 305, 704–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirman, J. H. (1973). Tactile communication of speech: A review and an analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 54–74.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H., Rebelsky, G. F., & Nichols, I. A. (1965). The vocalizations of infants born to deaf and hearing parents. Human Development, 8, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lynch, M. P., Eilers, R. E., Oiler, D. K., & Lavoie, L. (1988). Speech perception by congenital-ly deaf subjects using an electrocutaneous vocoder. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 25(3), 41–50.Google ScholarPubMed
Lynch, M. P., Eilers, R. E., Oller, D. K., & Cobo-Lewis, A. B. (1989). Multisensory speech perception by profoundly deaf children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 57–67.Google Scholar
Maskarinec, A. S., Cairns, G. F., Butterfield, E. C., & Weamer, D. K. (1981). Longitudinal observations of individual infants' vocalizations. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 46, 267–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mavilya, M. (1969). Spontaneous vocalization and babbling in hearing impaired infants. Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University. (University Microfilms No. 70–12879.)Google Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1980). The emergence of the sounds of speech in infancy. In Yeni-Komshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F., & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Child phonology: Vol. 1, Production. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1984). Speech-like vocalizations of normal and impaired infants. Paper presented at the Midwest Child Phonology Conference, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1986). Metaphonology and infant vocalizations. In Lindblom, B. & Zetterstrom, R. (Eds.), Precursors of early speech. Basingstoke, NH: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Oller, D. K., & Eilers, R. E. (1988). The role of audition in infant babbling. Child Development, 59, 441–449.Google Scholar
Oller, D. K., Eilers, R. E., Bull, D. H., & Carney, A. E. (1985). Prespeech vocalizations of a deaf infant: A comparison with normal metaphonological development. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 28, 47–63.Google Scholar
Reed, C. M., Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1982). Research on tactile communication of speech: A review. ASHA Monographs, 20.Google Scholar
Sanders, D. (1971). Aural rehabilitation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Saunders, F. (1985). Tacticon 1600 electrocutaneous vocoder. Concord, CA: Tacticon Co.Google Scholar
Schulte, F. K. (1970). Fonator System. In Fant, G. (Ed.), International symposium on speech communication ability with profound deafness (pp. 351–353). Washington, DC: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf.Google Scholar
Sherrick, C. E. (1984). Basic and applied research on tactile aids for deaf people: Progress and prospects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 75, 1325–1342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siemens, (1970). Polyfonator. Union, NJ: Siemens Co.Google Scholar
Sparks, D. W., Ardell, L. A., Bourgeois, M. R., & Kuhl, P. K. (1979). Investigating the MESA (multipoint electrotactile speech aid): The transmission of connected discourse. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 65(3), 810–815.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stark, R. E. (1980). Stages of speech development in the first year of life. In YeniKomshian, G. H., Kavanagh, J. F., & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Child phonology: Vol. 1: Production. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Stark, R. E., & Bond, J. L. (1983). Characteristics of reduplicated babbling in 6- to 8-month- old infants. Paper presented at the 106th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, San Diego, CA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C., & Otomo, K. (1986). Babbling development of hearing-impaired and normally hearing subjects. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51, 33–41.Google Scholar
West, M. J., & King, A. P. (1988). Female visual displays affect the development of male song in the cowbird. Nature, 334, 244–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, M. J., Stroud, A. N., & King, A. P. (1983). Mimicry of the human voice by European starlings: The role of social interaction. The Wilson Bulletin, 95(4), 635–640.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. R., & Thompson, G. (1984). Behavioral audiometry. In Jerger, J. (Ed.), Pediatric audiology. San Diego: College Hill Press.Google Scholar