Journal of Voice
Volume 24, Issue 5 , Pages 574-584, September 2010

Whispering—A Single-Subject Study of Glottal Configuration and Aerodynamics

  • Johan Sundberg

      Affiliations

    • Department of Speech, Music & Hearing, School of Computer Science and Communications, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to Johan Sundberg, Department of Speech, Music & Hearing, SE-100 44, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • ,
  • Ronald Scherer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Communication Disorders, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio
  • ,
  • Markus Hess

      Affiliations

    • Department of Phoniatrics and Paedaudiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
  • ,
  • Frank Müller

      Affiliations

    • Department of Phoniatrics and Paedaudiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Accepted 6 January 2009. published online 22 October 2009.

Summary 

Whisper productions were produced by a single adult male subject over a wide range of subglottal pressures, glottal areas, and glottal flows. Dimensional measurements were made of these three variables, including glottal perimeter. Subglottal pressure was directly obtained by a pressure transducer in a tracheal catheter, and wide-band flow with a pneumotach mask. Four types of whispers were used—hyperfunctional, hypofunctional, neutral, and postphonation—in addition to three levels of loudness (soft, medium, loud). Sequences of the /pae/ syllable were used. Video recordings of the larynx were made. The glottis was outlined by hand with extrapolation for unseen parts, and area and perimeter were obtained through image analysis software. The whisper tokens resulted in the following wide ranges: subglottal pressure: 1.3–17cm H2O; glottal flow: 0.9–1.71L/s; glottal area: 0.065–1.76cm2; and glottal perimeter: 1.09–6.55cm. Hyperfunctional whisper tended to have higher subglottal pressures and lower areas and flows than hypofunctional whisper, with neutral and postphonation whisper values in between. An important finding is that glottal flow changed more for small changes of area when the area was already small, and did not create much flow change when area was changed for already larger areas; that is, whisper is “more sensitive” to airflow changes for smaller glottal areas. A general equation for whisper aerodynamics was obtained, namely, P (subglottal pressure [cm H2O])=C×F (glottal flow [cm3/s]), where C=0.052×A40.1913×A3+0.2577×A20.1523×A+0.0388, where A is the glottal area (cm2). Another general equation for nondimensional terms (pressure coefficient vs Reynolds number) also is offered. Implications for whisper flow resistance and aerodynamic power are given. These results give insight into whisper aerodynamics and offer equations relevant to speech synthesis.

Key Words: Whisper, Subglottal pressure, Glottal airflow, Glottal flow, Glottal area, Glottal resistance, Glottal flow resistance, Subglottal power, Pressure coefficient, Reynolds number

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0892-1997(09)00006-X

doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.01.001

Journal of Voice
Volume 24, Issue 5 , Pages 574-584, September 2010