Exemplos de uso de Lisping em Inglês e suas traduções para o Português
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
Brown, lisping as Oswald.
No, say it properly, without lisping.
From here- a kartavost, lisping other defects of the speech, visits to the logopedist, children's complexes.
Ohh, are you making a bad pun or just lisping?
Table 1 presents the occurrence of lisping in voiced and unvoiced alveolar fricatives in the children investigated.
It's because from the day I was born, I have heard nothing butfour-count Burpees and constant, lisping criticism.
The greater occurrence of lisping in[s] based on the auditory perceptual evaluation may be explained by several factors.
This may have contributed to the greater auditory identification of lisping in unvoiced alveolar fricatives.
When the judgments of lisping were compared between the fricatives produced, a significant increase in lisping was observed for the alveolar fricative[s] compared with the alveolar fricative z.
When the same children produced phrases composed of the fricative[z], lisping was identified in the speech of 50% of the population.
Among the 39 children who had phonetic deviations alone,we observed that more than half showed distortion of phone[s] lisping or lateral lisp.
Some such studies investigated the occurrence of lisping when produced in words or other speech samples composed of alveolar consonants[s] and/or z.
The same tendency was observed in a previous study involving preschool children with occlusal alterations, in whom lisping was more noticed for[s] in controlled speech conditions.
The theme Occurrence of lisping in voiced and unvoiced fricatives in children with operated cleft lip and palate from the authors Whitaker, Dutka, Lauris, Pegoraro-Krook and Marino is the twenty-first contribution.
However, these studies did not investigate whether the production and/or auditory perceptual judgment of lisping differs between voiced and unvoiced alveolar fricatives.
To represent additional qualities of speech,such as tooth gnashing, lisping, and sounds made with a cleft lip and cleft palate, an extended set of symbols, the extensions to the International Phonetic Alphabet, may be used.
This study had a prospective design in which speech samples saved in a databank, after selected,were judged by speech-language pathologists as to the occurrence of lisping in voiced and unvoiced fricatives.
Future studies are necessary to widen the knowledge on the presence of lisping in voiced and unvoiced fricatives in individuals with and without craniofacial malformations.
Conversely, the possibility of efficient adaptation of children to the different structural conditions may cause a less distorted speech,which would impair the auditory perception of lisping in the presence of facial deformity.
Therefore, it is observed that the fricative[s]favors the identification of lisping by the examiner and may be used both for screening and clinical speech evaluations.
Particularly, when investigating differences in the occurrence oflisping between voiced and unvoiced fricatives, it was observed that lisping in the fricative[s] occurred in 23 72% out of 32 children, while in fricative[z] lisping was present in 16 50% of children.
This study evidenced that the selection of fricative consonants interfered with the auditory perception of lisping, with greater occurrence of lisping in the alveolar fricative[s] compared to z.
The present results demonstrated that, based on the auditory perceptual judgment, lisping was identified in most 72%, N=23 children with operated cleft lip and palate and significant alterations in interarch relationship. Particularly, when children produced phrases composed of[s], lisping was identified in the speech of 72% das of children.
A preliminary study involving preschool children with malocclusion yet without craniofacial malformations indicated greater occurrence of lisping in fricative[s] compared with[z], when auditory perceptual judgment was used.
Also, information on possible distinctions in the production and/or perception of lisping, comparing voiced and unvoiced alveolar fricatives, are limited in the national literature, even for individuals with malocclusion without cleft lip and palate.
The speech-language pathologists were asked to auditorily judge whether, during two consecutive repetitions of each phrase,at least one fricative segment inserted in these two repetitions was produced according to the target absence of lisping or if there was lisping i.e. when the fricative segment was produced with some type of distortion/noise.
The present findings also agree with previous information in the literature for children without craniofacial malformations, in which lisping was not observed in all preschool children with malocclusion. In these studies, the presence of morphological alterations malocclusion was considered a factor that favors the presence of lisping, yet it should not be considered determinant.
However, information on possible disorders in the production and/or perception of lisping, comparing voiced or unvoiced alveolar fricatives, are limited in the national literature.
The present findings suggest that unfavorable dentofacial conditions may favor the occurrence of lisping in voiced and unvoiced alveolar fricatives, when identified by auditory perceptual judgment.
In general, these findings indicate that dentofacial deformities favor the auditory perception of distortions lisping in the speech of children with operated cleft lip and palate, confirming previous descriptions for this population.