Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The use of automatic speech recognition showing the influence of nasality on speech intelligibility

  • Rhinology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Altered nasality influences speech intelligibility. Automatic speech recognition (ASR) has proved suitable for quantifying speech intelligibility in patients with different degrees of nasal emissions. We investigated the influence of hyponasality on the results of speech recognition before and after nasal surgery using ASR. Speech recordings, nasal peak inspiratory flow and self-perception measurements were carried out in 20 German-speaking patients (8 women, 12 men; aged 38 ± 22 years) who underwent surgery for various nasal and sinus pathologies. The degree of speech intelligibility was quantified as the percentage of correctly recognized words of a standardized word chain by ASR (word recognition rate; WR). WR was measured 1 day before (t1), 1 day after with nasal packings (t2), and 3 months after (t3) surgery; nasal peak flow on t1 and t3. WR was calculated with program for the automatic evaluation of all kinds of speech disorders (PEAKS). WR as a parameter of speech intelligibility was significantly decreased immediately after surgery (t1 vs. t2 p < 0.01) but increased 3 months after surgery (t2 vs. t3 p < 0.01). WR showed no association with age or gender. There was no significant difference between WR at t1 and t3, despite a post-operative increase in nasal peak inspiratory flow measurements. The results show that ASR is capable of quantifying the influence of hyponasality on speech; nasal obstruction leads to significantly reduced WR and nasal peak flow cannot replace evaluation of nasality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Friedrich G, Bigenzahn W (1995) Phoniatrie—Einführung in die medizinischen, psychologischen und linguistischen Grundlagen von Stimme und Sprache. Verlag Hans Huber, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fant G (1970) Acoustic theory of speech production: with calculations based on X-ray studies of Russian articulations. Walter de Gruyter, Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schuster M, Haderlein T, Nkenke E, Wohlleben U, Rosanowski F, Eysholdt U, Nöth E (2006) Evaluation of speech intelligibility for children with cleft lip and palate by means of speech recognizer technique. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 70:1741–1747

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schuster M, Haderlein T, Noth E, Lohscheller J, Eysholdt U, Rosanowski F (2006) Intelligibility of laryngectomees’ substitute speech: automatic speech recognition and subjective rating. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 263:188–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Henningsson G, Kuehn DP, Sell D, Sweeney T, Trost-Cardamone JE, Whitehill TL (2008) Universal parameters for reporting speech outcomes in individuals with cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 45:1–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hosemann W, Gode U, Dunker JE, Eysholdt U (1998) Influence of endoscopic sinus surgery on voice quality. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 255:499–503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lund VJ, Kennedy DW (1997) Staging for rhinosinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:S35–S40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hosemann W (2000) Chronic sinusitis and obstructive respiratory tract diseases. Laryngorhinootologie 79:643–644

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dursun E, Bayiz U, Korkmaz H, Akmansu H, Uygur K (1998) Follow-up results of 415 patients after endoscopic sinus surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 255:504–510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Catalano P, Roffman E (2003) Outcome in patients with chronic sinusitis after the minimally invasive sinus technique. Am J Rhinol 17:17–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Iro H, Mayr S, Schick B, Mrakovcic G, Wigand ME (2006) Clinical outcome of partial ethmoidectomy for chronic rhinosinusitis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 263:572–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Marquez S (2008) The paranasal sinuses: the last frontier in craniofacial biology. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 291:1350–1361

    Google Scholar 

  13. Leopold D (1996) A history of rhinology in North America. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 115:283–297

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stammberger H (1989) History of rhinology: anatomy of the paranasal sinuses. Rhinology 27:197–210

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hong KH, Kwon SH, Jung SS (1997) The assessment of nasality with a nasometer and sound spectrography in patients with nasal polyposis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:343–348

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Beule AG, Hosemann W (2009) Wound healing after endoscopic sinus surgery and postoperative management. HNO 57:763–771

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wigand ME (1981) Transnasal, endoscopical sinus surgery for chronic sinusitis. I. A biomechanical concept of the endonasal mucosa surgery (author’s transl). HNO 29:215–221

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Petursson M, Neppert J (1996) Elementarbuch der Phonetik. Buske Verlag, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ohala JJ (1993) Coarticulation and phonology. Lang Speech 36(Pt 2–3):155–170

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dang J, Honda K, Suzuki H (1994) Morphological and acoustical analysis of the nasal and the paranasal cavities. J Acoust Soc Am 96:2088–2100

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen MY, Metson R (1997) Effects of sinus surgery on speech. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 123:845–852

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Windrich M, Maier A, Kohler R, Noth E, Nkenke E, Eysholdt U, Schuster M (2008) Automatic quantification of speech intelligibility of adults with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Folia Phoniatr Logop 60:151–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gallwitz F, Niemann H, Nöth E (1999) Spracherkennung—Stand der Technik, Einsatzmöglichkeiten und Perspektiven. Wirtschaftsinformatik 41:538–547

    Google Scholar 

  24. Euler E (2006) Grundkurs Spracherkennung. Vieweg-Verlag, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gales M, Pye D, Woodland P (1996) Variance compensation within the MLLR framework for robust speech recognition and speaker adaptation. In: Proceedings of ICSLP’96, Philadelphia, USA

  26. Vogt B, Maier A, Batliner A, Noth E, Nkenke E, Eysholdt U, Schuster M (2007) Numeric quantification of intelligibility in schoolchildren with isolated and combined cleft palate. HNO 55:891–898

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wigand ME (1981) Transnasal, endoscopical surgery for chronic sinusitis. III. Endonasal ethmoidectomy (author’s transl). HNO 29:287–293

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wigand ME (1981) Transnasal, endoscopical sinus surgery for chronic sinusitis. II. Endonasal operation of the maxillary antrum (author’s transl). HNO 29:263–269

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Maier A, Nöth E, Nkenke E, Schuster M (2006) Fully automatic assessment of speech of children with cleft lip and palate. Informatica 30(4):477–482

    Google Scholar 

  30. Maier A, Haderlein T, Eysholdt U, Rosanowski F, Batliner A, Schuster M, Nöth E (2009) Peaks—a system for the automatic evaluation of voice and speech disorders. Speech Commun 51:425–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Haderlein T, Noth E, Toy H, Batliner A, Schuster M, Eysholdt U, Hornegger J, Rosanowski F (2007) Automatic evaluation of prosodic features of tracheoesophageal substitute voice. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264:1315–1321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pearson K (1896) Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution III regression, heredity and panmixia. Philos Trans R Soc London 187:253–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Smith BE, Kuehn DP (2007) Speech evaluation of velopharyngeal dysfunction. J Craniofac Surg 18:251–261 quiz 266–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dworkin JP, Marunick MT, Krouse JH (2004) Velopharyngeal dysfunction: speech characteristics, variable etiologies, evaluation techniques, and differential treatments. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 35:333–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen MY (1997) Acoustic correlates of English and French nasalized vowels. J Acoust Soc Am 102:2360–2370

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kitzing P, Maier A, Ahlander VL (2009) Automatic speech recognition (ASR) and its use as a tool for assessment or therapy of voice, speech, and language disorders. Logoped Phoniatr Vocol 34:91–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Scipioni M, Gerosa M, Giuliani D, Noeth E, Maier A (2009) Intelligibility assessment in children with cleft lip and palate in Italian and German. In: Moore R (Ed) 10th annual conference of the international speech communication association (Interspeech 2009). ISCA, Brighton, England, pp 967–970

  38. Wilpon JG, Jacobsen C (1996) A study of speech recognition for children and the elderly. In: Proceedings of ICASSP, pp 349–352

  39. Dames F, Maier A, Schutzenberger A, Stelzle F, Holst A, Noth E, Eysholdt U, Schuster M (2009) Intelligibility of children with bilateral and unilateral cleft lip and palate. Laryngorhinootologie 88:723–728

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Soneghet R, Santos RP, Behlau M, Habermann W, Friedrich G, Stammberger H (2002) Nasalance changes after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. J Voice 16:392–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Yue J, Kong W, Tan H, Xiong X, Zhang X, Wang Y, Zhang S (2006) The effects of endoscopic sinus surgery on nasality and nasal patency. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi 20:917–918, 921

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cecil M, Tindall L, Haydon R (2001) The relationship between dysphonia and sinusitis: a pilot study. J Voice 15:270–277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sundberg J, Birch P, Gumoes B, Stavad H, Prytz S, Karle A (2007) Experimental findings on the nasal tract resonator in singing. J Voice 21:127–137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lam DJ, James KT, Weaver EM (2006) Comparison of anatomic, physiological, and subjective measures of the nasal airway. Am J Rhinol 20:463–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Clement PA, Gordts F (2005) Consensus report on acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry. Rhinology 43:169–179

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Numminen J, Dastidar P, Rautiainen M (2004) Influence of sinus surgery in rhinometric measurements. J Otolaryngol 33:98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Julia von Ochsenstein and Anika Ströbele for their great support in performing this study.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital, University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Waldstrasse 1, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    S. Mayr, K. Burkhardt, K. Rogler & H. Iro

  2. Division of Phoniatrics and Pedaudiology, University Hospital, University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Bohlenplatz 21, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    M. Schuster

  3. Pattern Recognition Lab, School of Engineering, University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Martensstrasse 3, 91058, Erlangen, Germany

    A. Maier

Authors
  1. S. Mayr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Burkhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Schuster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Rogler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. Iro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Mayr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mayr, S., Burkhardt, K., Schuster, M. et al. The use of automatic speech recognition showing the influence of nasality on speech intelligibility. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 267, 1719–1725 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-010-1256-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-010-1256-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation