Theories about speech production and its underlying rules are of increasing interest for linguistic research and have been for many years already.
Errors of speech play an important role in these theories, as do errors in reading and writing. Although latter error types deliver further evidence supporting the ideas presented in this paper, the considerations gathered will, in default of space, be restricted to slips of the tongue. This error type is by Boomer’s and Laver’s definition: “an involuntary deviation in performance from the speaker’s current phonological, grammatical or lexical intention.”
Further distinctions will be made in respective chapters of this paper. Each error type will be illustrated by examples found in the appendixes of Fromkin’s “Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence” (1973) and Cutler’s “Slips of the Tongue and Language Production” (1982). All of the presented examples will be indented and made up in the same way: the intended sentence, phrase or word is to be found on the left, the erroneous output follows after a symbol.
Where it is possible, personal observations and own examples are added.
Table of Contents
General Introduction
1. General notions of speech production and error types
1.1 Theoretical and biological approaches – models of speech production
1.2 The First Law and historical change
1.3 Distinguishing errors and associated difficulties
2. Error types and inferred conclusions
2.1 Anticipation and Perseveration errors
2.2 Omission and Addition errors
2.3 Exchange and Substitution errors
2.4 Blends and Spoonerisms
3. Summary of presented ideas and conclusion
Objectives and Research Focus
This paper explores the linguistic significance of speech errors to gain deeper insights into the mental lexicon and the complex mechanisms underlying human speech production. By analyzing various slip-of-the-tongue phenomena, the research aims to determine how error data can provide a window into the speaker's mind and reveal the structural organization of language processing.
- Analysis of theoretical and biological models of speech production.
- Examination of specific error categories including anticipation, perseveration, and blends.
- Investigation of the difficulties in collecting and categorizing speech error data under natural versus laboratory conditions.
- Evaluation of the mental lexicon as a multi-dimensional network rather than a linear structure.
- Discussion of how speech errors challenge conventional notions of "normal" speech.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 Anticipation and Perseveration errors
Anticipation errors are produced when a segment of an utterance resembles another one that was planned to appear in a later part of the structure. These errors seem to be the most frequent ones, that is, in comparable collections (as mentioned above, linguists often develop own systems of categorization, making it therefore complicated to find basic data or notions that can actually be compared). Both Cohen24 and Nooteboom25 found that more than 70 % of errors detected in their respective corpuses of spontaneous Dutch speech are of this kind. They achieved similar results when evaluating data collected under laboratorial circumstances.
Perseveration errors are produced the opposite way: a segment resembles an earlier one that already occurred in the regarded utterance. Cohen found that these appear far less frequently – only 15 % in a corpus of 600 errors were of said kind26. Moreover, he proposes a third error type closely related to the ones describes above, namely transposition errors which involve the influence of both earlier and later segments27. One could argue that these are special types of anticipation and perseveration errors and hardly distinguishable, making them a questionable category (which is furthermore not included in the system this paper uses to gather comparable data and types, see p. 5). Therefore, their impact on speech theories won’t be examined here.
The occurrence of anticipation and perseveration errors suggests that some segments may be taken together in related chunks in order to allow a faster processing of words during speech production28. If the speaker’s mind is in some way still dealing with these bits (earlier or later) of an utterance or the speaker is otherwise distracted, the described error types may appear. Anticipation errors were found on segment- and word-level, while perseveration errors were found on segment level only29.
Summary of Chapters
General Introduction: Provides an overview of theories regarding speech production and defines the scope of the study as an analysis of slips of the tongue.
1. General notions of speech production and error types: Explores theoretical models of speech planning and the challenges associated with defining and collecting speech error data.
2. Error types and inferred conclusions: Categorizes various speech errors, such as anticipation, perseveration, omission, and blends, to analyze their role in mental lexicon organization.
3. Summary of presented ideas and conclusion: Synthesizes the findings and reinforces the value of speech errors as empirical data for understanding the human mind.
Keywords
Speech production, mental lexicon, slips of the tongue, anticipation errors, perseveration errors, linguistics, speech error analysis, phonological features, morphological errors, linguistic evidence, competing plans, error frequency, language processing, cognitive psychology, spoonerisms.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental subject of this paper?
The paper focuses on the linguistic analysis of speech errors, specifically slips of the tongue, to understand the rules and mental processes involved in speech production.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
The core themes include theoretical speech models, the classification of error types, the impact of the environment on error collection, and the structural design of the mental lexicon.
What is the primary research goal?
The primary goal is to examine how speech error data can offer a window into the speaker's mind and demonstrate how language is stored and processed.
Which methodology is employed in this research?
The study utilizes a qualitative comparison of existing linguistic theories and established speech error corpuses to evaluate the significance of different error categories.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body covers models of speech production, the distinction between various error types (like anticipation vs. perseveration), and the debate surrounding speech errors as "normal" versus "erroneous" performance.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include speech production, mental lexicon, slips of the tongue, anticipation and perseveration errors, and linguistic evidence.
How do anticipation and perseveration errors differ?
Anticipation errors occur when a future segment influences the current one, while perseveration errors occur when a previously spoken segment interferes with the current one.
Why does the author consider speech errors as evidence for a "multi-dimensional network"?
The author argues that errors like additions and blends demonstrate that the mental lexicon is not a linear dictionary, but a complex, interconnected network where competing plans can coexist.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Lena Meyer (Autor:in), 2012, To what Extent do Speech Errors serve as Linguistic Evidence?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/299329
