Cross-Linguistic Analysis of Speech Markers: Insights from English, Chinese, and Italian Speakers
Santi, G. C.; Catricala, E.; Kwan, S.; Wong, A.; Ezzes, Z.; Wauters, L.; Esposito, V.; Conca, F.; Gibbons, D.; Fernandez, E.; Santos-Santos, M. A.; Chen, T.-F.; Kwan-Chen, L. L.-Y.; Lo, R. R.; Tsoh, J.; Lung-Tat Chen, A.; Garcia, A. M.; de Leon, J.; Miller, Z.; Vonk, J. M. J.; Bruffaerts, R.; Grasso, S. M.; Allen, I. E.; Cappa, S. F.; Gorno-Tempini, M.-L.; Tee, B. L.
Show abstract
Cross-linguistic studies with healthy individuals are vital, as they can reveal typologically common and different patterns while providing tailored benchmarks for patient studies. Nevertheless, cross-linguistic differences in narrative speech production, particularly among speakers of languages belonging to distinct language families, have been inadequately investigated. Using a picture description task, we analyze cross-linguistic variations in connected speech production across three linguistically diverse groups of cognitively normal participants--English, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese), and Italian speakers. We extracted 28 linguistic features, encompassing phonological, lexico-semantic, morpho-syntactic, and discourse/pragmatic domains. We utilized a semi-automated approach with Computerized Language ANalysis (CLAN) to compare the frequency of production of various linguistic features across the three language groups. Our findings revealed distinct proportional differences in linguistic feature usage among English, Chinese, and Italian speakers. Specifically, we found a reduced production of prepositions, conjunctions, and pronouns, and increased adverb use in the Chinese-speakers compared to the other two languages. Furthermore, English participants produced a higher proportion of prepositions, while Italian speakers produced significantly more conjunctions and empty pauses than the other groups. These findings demonstrate that the frequency of specific linguistic phenomena varies across languages, even when using the same harmonized task. This underscores the critical need to develop linguistically tailored language assessment tools and to identify speech markers that are appropriate for aphasia patients across different languages.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Is there a bilingual advantage in auditory attention among children? A systematic review and meta-analysis of standardized auditory attention tests 92%
- Hearing and cognitive decline in aging differentially impact neural tracking of context-supported versus random speech across linguistic timescales 91%
- Disentangling listening effort and memory load beyond behavioural evidence 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- High frequency post-pause word choices and task-dependent speech behavior characterize connected speech in individuals with mild cognitive impairment 94%
- Automatic subtyping of individuals with Primary Progressive Aphasia 94%
- Neurodevelopmental effects of genetic frontotemporal dementia mutations revealed by total intracranial volume differences 84%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.