Phonetic Aspects of Speech Communication

Nadeina set out to develop methods of speech development in Russian as a mother tongue, focusing on improving diction, training in voice quality control, intonation control, the removal of dialect, and speech etiquette. She began with training in the receptive skills of language, i.e. reading and listening, since the interpretation of someone else's language plays an important role in language production. Her studies of students' reading speed of students showed that it varies between 40 and 120 words per minute, which is normally considered very slow. She discovered a strong correlation between speed of reading and speaking skills: the slower a person reads the worse is their ability to speak and has designed exercises to improve reading skills. Nadeina also believes that listening to other people's speech is very important, both to analyse its content and in some cases as an example, so listening skills need to be developed. Many people have poor pronunciation habits acquired as children. On the basis of speech samples from young Russians (male and female, aged 17-22), Nadeina analysed the commonest speech faults - nasalisation, hesitation and hemming at the end of sense-groups, etc. Using a group of twenty listeners, she looked for a correlation between how voice quality is perceived and certain voice quality parameters, e.g. pitch range, tremulousness, fluency, whispering, harshness, sonority, tension and audible breath. She found that the less non-linguistic segment variations in speech appeared, the more attractive the speech was rated. The results are included in a textbook aimed at helping people to improve their oral skills and to communicate ideas to an audience. She believes this will assist Russian officials in their attempts to communicate their ideas to different social spheres, and also foreigners learning Russian.

Language, Thought, Relativism, Nationalism: An Interdisciplinary Study

Ms. Neumer and her team began their project with a critical analysis of the various theories of the relationship between language and thought. Their aim was to develop a theoretical position concerning the issue of universalism versus relativism. This issue is closely bound up with one of the main questions of the history of East and Central Europe, namely, the question of the nation, and the possibility of mutual understanding between national cultures. The team attempted to avoid falling into an all-too-common trap, that of allowing a political perspective to obscure the central theoretical issues. In a project whose outcome totalled over 1000 pages of manuscript in German, English and Hungarian, they touched on cognitive psychological, linguistic, semiotic, socio-semiotic, and other such themes. Their experience has convinced them of the fruitful heuristic possibilities of the interaction of scientific and philosophical approaches in this area of research. A preliminary analysis of the history of philosophy and inquiries into conceptual fields revealed that, in order to reach strong relativist conclusions concerning the unity of thought and language, it is required to take as a point of departure the widest possible sense of these concepts. But in fact, such an option ends up refuting itself: pursuing the premises to their final conclusion one arrives at the restriction of relativism. The team outlined a theory of the understanding of the Other which, borrowing from analytical as well as continental-hermeneutic trends, does not underestimate, on the one hand, the difficulties of understanding between various forms of life, cultures, and languages, but, on the other hand, can provide an alternative solution to the theory of incommensurabiltiy. Within the boundary of this problematic the team studied the problems of translatability, the acquisition of the mother and foreign languages, and natural or cultural determinacy of kind terms. The team regards its most original contribution to be the association of the problem of relativism-universalism and the language-thought relation with contemporary investigations into the question of orality, literacy, and secondary orality. Their conclusion was that, although certain connections can be revealed both between forms of communication and the thesis of the unity of language and thought, and between periods in the history of communication and the predominance of relativistic or universalistic tendencies, forms of communication do not unequivocally determine the answers to these questions.