Saudi Cultural Missions Theses & Dissertations
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://drepo.sdl.edu.sa/handle/20.500.14154/10
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Restricted Phonological Development of Typically Developing Monolingual Saudi Hejazi Arabic-speaking children Aged 2;6–5;11(2022-09) Turki, Deema Fawzi; Fricke, SilkeA reliable diagnosis of speech sound disorders (SSDs) in any language requires the availability of assessment tools following international linguistic and psychometric guidelines (Hua, 2006) and normative data on speech development for that language (Fabiano-Smith, 2019). To date, these criteria still need to be fulfilled for Saudi Hejazi Arabic (SHA). Normative data on phonological development that is theoretically and developmentally reliable is still missing for SHA-speaking children. This thesis aimed to describe the typical phonetic and phonological development in monolingual SHA- speaking pre-schoolers. Speech samples were collected cross-sectionally using a newly designed, linguistically controlled picture naming test (SHAPA) and a phone–imitation (stimulability) task from 235 SHA-speaking children in Saudi Arabia, aged 2;6–5;11 (7x6–month age bands). SHAPA includes 151 words to elicit urban Hejazi Arabic (UHA) and Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) phoneme inventory. All samples were phonetically transcribed using Phon (Rose & MacWhinney, 2014). SHAPA was evaluated regarding its construction criteria, items’ familiarities and suitability as a clinical assessment tool. The speech data were analysed regarding 1) the age of SHA-speaking children acquire and master the Arabic (UHA and MSA) phonetic system (PCC, PCC-R, PVC, PCCC, C and CC structures’ age of acquisition), and 2) the occurrence (Tokens and Types) of phonological patterns typically for SHA-speaking children, and those phonological variants that occur in children’s speech but not frequently enough to be counted as phonological patterns (InfVar). Two cut-off criteria (≥4 and ≥6) were applied to distinguish InfVar from phonological patterns. SHAPA successfully elicited a sample for phonetic and phonological analysis since its construction requirements nearly met the international construction criteria. However, it was a lengthy test with a low incidence of spontaneous naming. All quantitative and qualitative measurements revealed a general developmental tendency, with an acquisition rate almost identical to prior Arabic research. Phonetic analysis indicated that SHA-speaking children achieved an average score of >80% for PCC and PCC-R by age 4;0, and they approached 90% by age 5;0. They acquired all shared UHA and MSA consonants (i.e. 75% accuracy) by age 3;11 and mastered them by age 4;5 (i.e. 90% accuracy), except for postalveolar /ʃ/ and /ʒ/. The stimulability task revealed that the phonetic inventory of the children in the oldest age group was not completed (for both UHA and MSA phones) because some phones were difficult to be imitated (e.g. the emphatic consonant and the trill /r/). The number of Tokens, Types, and InfrVar decreased steadily with age. Twenty-seven patterns were identified in children’s speech, with only four phonological patterns and one phonetic distortion existing across all age groups using both cut-off criteria. While all structural simplifications were overcome by 4;11, certain systemic simplifications and one phonetic distortion were still found when the upper cut-off criterion was used (i.e., fronting of /ʃ, ʒ/, devoicing, vowel substitution, and sibilants distortion /s, z, ʃ, ʒ/). These findings highlighted that children’s phonetic and phonological development was not completed by age 5;11. The theoretical and clinical implications of the results were discussed.42 0Item Restricted THE INTERACTION OF STRESS AND PHONOLOGICAL VARIATION IN QASSIMI ARABIC(2023) Alnuqaydan, Ahmed; Kaplan, AaronThis dissertation studies the phonology and phonetics of an understudied variety of Arabic: Qassimi Arabic (QA). It acoustically investigates the QA prosodic system and examines its interaction with segmental phonology. Various optional and categorical phonological processes arise from such interaction. The analyses for the optional processes are tested against a handful of optionality theories, namely, Partial Orders, Noisy Harmonic Grammar, Maximum Entropy, and rank-ordered model of EVAL. Only the first two models are compatible with the QA optional data. QA has a default-to-left stress: primary stress falls on the rightmost heavy syllable, otherwise, it falls on the initial syllable. The acoustic experiment’s results show that stress is expressed by longer duration, greater intensity, higher F0 and higher F1. An Optimality Theoretic (OT) account of the QA stress system is provided. This forms the foundation for various analyses of the optional and categorical phonological processes. Triconsonantal clusters (CCCs) in QA exhibit a complicated behavior that can only be explained by taking into account the interaction between morphosyntax, phonology and perceptibility factors. Word-internal CCCs are avoided by vowel epenthesis. Monomorphemic CCCs are variably realized as CVCC or CCVC in an older dialect, while a younger dialect categorically produces CCVC. Monomorphemic CVCC satisfies a tendency of placing heavy stressed syllables close to the right edge of the word while CCVC avoids stressed epenthetic vowels. Word-internal heteromorphemic CCCs are categorically avoided by vowel epenthesis at the morpheme boundary, a consequence of O-CONTIGUITY. However, epenthesis does not occur in two situations: when the third consonant is a glide (a fact attributed to the glide’s ability to host the middle C’s perceptual cues), and when CCC arises across word boundaries. Certain combinations of pronominal suffixes exhibit optional alternations that facilitate placing heavy stressed syllables close to the right edge of the word. These alternations can be blocked by homophony avoidance. Other combinations of pronominal suffixes do not undergo the optional alternations suggesting that when certain morphosyntactic features are present in the input, the suffixes are treated underlyingly as one which explains the blockage of optionality.18 0