Talk:Speech disfluency

Arabic

I'm slightly offended that whoever wrote about Arabs saying 'ya3ni' (which an IPA transcription /jæʕni/ or /jaʕni/ would be MUCH more preferable to the 'ya'ani' given) felt the need to say that Egyptians in particular say it. It's an ARAB thing, not an Egyptian thing. There's no citation either. I'm deleting the reference to Egyptians. cullen (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The line

I'm not sure where the line between speech disfluencies such as "uh" and "er" lie and something more, err, "pathological" like stuttering or stammering lies... could someone more in the know maybe flesh that out? This term seems to encompass an entire range of acoustic phenomena and my brief survey of the technical literature available via Google doesn't seem to distinguish between these two uses of term that I see. Are they the same? Different? Different aspects of the same category? Uh? Eh? Ack! --Fastfission 21:07, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Uh, let's see about that, eh? I just *typed* the words "uh" and "eh"; that means they're not too "accidental" like stammering or anything; otherwise I would have corrected them, right?

If you're wondering why people do something, do it yourself and see why :-) --Ihope127 19:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. "Uh" and "huh" are themselves words which likely came into our language because of the fact that they're easy to say: the only consonant is the letter h. It's the human version of a cat's meow. Indeed we even have phrases built out of these "words", such as "Uh-huh" and "Eh? Oh, heh". Even lazier versions eliminate all vowels, replacing them with "m": "Mm-hmm" and "Hmm? Mm, hm". --Ihope127 20:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

it doesn't work like that. study skills owns this article and all of wikipedia --clinton denton fentonbenton

Japanese

I heard once that something along the lines of ano is also used in Japanese. Any verification on that? --IvanP 15:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Don't take my word for it, but I think that it is either an equivalent to "um", or it is intended to informally grab people's attention. So perhaps this counts. --134.48.103.32 18:40, 07 March 2006 (UTC)

I've always heard "ano" used, not the one mentioned in the article. -- LGagnon 02:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Our Japanese teacher once explained that ee-to (with e pronounced as e in egg) is approx. equivalent to "um let me see..." while anou just meant "hmm or um". 130.194.13.104 12:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, ano is the Japanese word for uh, umm or er. Watch the film Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters, and in the Temple of the Golden Pavilion section, a young man (superimposed onto the young Mishima from the previous scene) repeatedly says Ano a-ano while the subtitle shows he is stammering.

Nuttyskin (talk) 14:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Consistency of disfluency across language

I added some information about how disfluency's distribution is constant across languages: see Eklund & Shriberg (1998). Kylebgorman 02:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

IPA Representations

I don't think that the difference between "er" and "errr" is really clear enough - an IPA representation of each disfluency feature would be useful. I'm not sure if this is relevant either - but in my Language course we've been taught the terms "non-fluency features" and "filled pauses" for the same speech phenomenon. Should those be noted also? Seegoon 17:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

IPA representations from the original authors would definitely be useful, especially considering the number of ways things like eh/ay can be pronounced and spelt - it's not good enough to assume that eh is something like /æi:/ (the main article on the subject mentions /əh/) --Dom 06:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Like

While "like" can be a disfluency term, I think it's mostly only really usable in certain grammatical contexts. The example "I, like, don't know" sounds really fake to me (and I'm a young suburban Southern Californian — "like" is definitely something I'm accustomed to). I'm not sure what the specific "permissible" contexts are, but I think it's worth noting. -Branddobbe 03:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

"Like" has certainly been a part of English-language speech in this context for much longer than since the 1980s as the article describes. I can't confirm this, but it seems to me that it may be as old as jazz, the oldest existing popular music style with which I associate this particular usage. B7T 13:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and besides, like has its own page already. I'm going to remove that section and add it to See Also instead. 24.107.114.96 (talk) 00:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Like vs. Uh

I changed the statement about "like" being used as "uh" and "um" to clarify. "like" in that context is technically a "discourse marker" (according to the LDC and Penn Treebank-3, 1993). These differ from filled pauses ("uh" and "um"). Kylebgorman 02:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew

Don't people use "Em..." in Hebrew? Shouldn't that be in the article, instead of lumping it together with Spanish?--Mo-Al 01:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

You know

I've found that "you know" is becoming a common speech disfluency. You know? jcloudm 20 Aug 2006

see Discourse marker. dr.ef.tymac 15:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

mandarin chinese

mandarin speakers do NOT use "er" as their main "filler word". who comes up with this stuff? i tried to put in an entry last week, but someone deemed it unfitting.

you should put back in the stuff about 那个 (nige or naige) as a filler phrase in Mandarin, I'm learning Chinese, and I came here looking for info about that. 136.165.46.93 17:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Language Dependence

I removed this section. While it did try to cite a source, it wasn't clear whether the Times article was speaking scientifically, giving 'folksy wisdom', or being humorous, and it didn't cite any sources to help us determine which. --Aquillion 18:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to re-add it, as well as add another citation. Although the article was a bit vague in its substantiation, the general point of this section is non-controversial. Speech disfluences do indeed vary depending on native language. dr.ef.tymac 19:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Why have this section when they're an entire other Wiki article (with a better formatted list) that has filled pauses across languages? Filler_(linguistics). I'd argue this section should be removed, replaced with a link to that article. MalignantMouse (talk) 16:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

W

Great to see "W" get in there! He almost needs his own category :) Ddddan 23:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You know, this isn't supposed to be a list of quotations. If we use Bush's quote, we should credit him, otherwise it's plagiarism... but if we credit him, the quote belongs in a quotations section. Should we add a quotations section, in which case we'll need more quotes to fill it out, or remove the example in question? MrNerdHair (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

To me, the Bush quote stands out as not quite belonging. While it does have disfluencies, the fact that it's also a badly mangled proverb distracts from those. Someone not familiar with the term "disfluency" might conflate the actual definition with the more broad errors on display.Dindon (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Swedish

Don't know if we should add it but in Swedish we have: liksom - like alltså/asså - approx. well öh - er --89.233.224.13 (talk) 20:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

German

Today I heard a German speaking English saying something like "hnah" in the time between several words. I wondered if this was typical in German or just for this guy. I came to this article for confirmation. Anyone know? Bugloaf (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Never heard that. In German we say äh, pronounced as very long a in man. --Hans Eo (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

What I've noticed is that Germans speaking their own language often make a kind of 'hmm' sound with a question intonation in mid-sentence - perhaps the equivalent of a rising intonation at the end of English sentences, supposedly a sign of diffidence. I've never heard this sound in any other language, and it seems to be confined to North Germans - I can't imagine a Bavarian or an Austrian using it. I've even adopted it myself in the hope it will make my German sound more authentic! Perhaps the German you heard was trying to do the same thing in English.213.127.210.95 (talk) 14:27, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

herp derp?

Do native English speakers ever say "herp" or "derp" by way of disfluency, or is this something made up because it sounds amusing, like "duh?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.40.21 (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

No, absolutely never. It's an internet slang neologism. 76.26.105.24 (talk) 11:51, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm a native speaker, and I'd never even heard of the expression till now - then again, I'm 64 and keep well clear of social media....213.127.210.95 (talk) 14:27, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

how to cure?

I miss a section about "how to cure it?" Scientists seem to analyse the matter very carefully. Maybe that research will even find its way into textbooks for learning languages. How to um in Englisch correctly?

There shoud be literature about how to cure it? --Hans Eo (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Huh citation

You have repeatedly removed the citation, and I think you are over the WP:3RR
Huh?
Schuessler, Jennifer (November 9, 2013). "The Syllable that Everyone Understands". The New York Times. Retrieved November 9, 2013. is a WP:RS, and this article puts it all into perspective. It has a New York Time permanent link, and puts the more schlarly article into perspective for lay persons to read and understand. It should be left As Is. Let\s disccuss this and come to a consensus as a group. WP:BRD 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I have only reverted my own edits, which has nothing to do with WP:3RR First I found that the article was reporting the publication of a research paper which has now been added as a citation, which negates the need for media comment. Speech disfluency is medical issue, and as such requires peer reviewed secondary or review scientific research citations to support content. And the New York Times is not even a research journal. I included a link to the New York Times article in the external links section. The aim of wikipedia articles is to explain the content of research papers in lay terms, which is then supported by review paper or secondary research, and not to lay summaries as citations dolfrog (talk) 06:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. I agree that the article is primarily medical, but parts of it aren't — it also relates to linguistics. In any event, your proposed solution works for me. I did put into proper form the articles' citations. If you need to remove it as a reference, and leave it as an external link, go ahead.7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I am only really passing bye, I visited the article as it was mentioned on one of my Watchlist talk pages. My own disability can sometimes cause speech dysfluency, as I can have word recall issues. I created a quick PubMed research paper collection, Speech Disfluency which may help you and others find more support citations. I hope it helps dolfrog (talk) 12:54, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I can now better understand your viewpoint on this being a medical issue. Thanks for your help. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Why is this here at all? The 'huh' being described in this piece of work is an interrogative particle --- as this article currently notes! --- and not a speech disfluency. It's not a hesitation, and it has nothing to do with fluency whatsoever. It should be removed entirely from this article. MalignantMouse (talk) 16:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. Wikipedia is not paper. It is better to include and have a reader decide it doesn't help than it is to peremptorily remove it and deny the reader the choice. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:15, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Dangling Participle

QUOTE: Research has shown that the word/syllable "Huh" is perhaps the most recognized syllable throughout the world, including variations of "mama" and "papa." UNQUOTE. The word "including" is a participle, but it is unclear what noun it modifies. As it stands, the meaning might seem to be, "throughout the world, a world that includes variations …." Did you mean to say, Q: Research has shown that the word/syllable "Huh" is perhaps the most recognized syllable throughout the world, a syllable even more recognizable than variations of "mama" and "papa." UNQ ? (EnochBethany (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC))

Mrs. Wilma Brown, my 4th, 5th & 6th Grades English Teacher, would agree with you. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, thank goodness - I thought I was the only one that still cared about these things!213.127.210.95 (talk) 14:14, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Language-dependence

No love for the Spanish "pues..."? 66.201.56.186 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

The different language versions don't match!

A common error on Wikipedia is that the different language versions of articles don't match, and get linked up at the whim of whoever is writing. In this case the number of available versions varies from language to language: the French version mentions Spanish whereas the English one doesn't; other versions mention Russian and Czech; some mention Hungarian, others don't. Worse, the article titles vary depending on which language you're switching from, and so do the links in the 'See also' sections. If you follow one particular loop from here - via Czech - you end up with a different English article (on 'fillers'), from which you can then go to different articles in other languages - and maybe never find your way back! This could perhaps be tidied up by merging topics, but right now it's an utter mess. The Spanish version (on 'muletillas' such as Ernesto Guevara's famous Argentinian 'che', which gave him his nickname) deals with whole phrases such as 'quiero decir' = 'I mean', 'digamos' = '(let's) say' and '¿vale?' = 'right?', rather than the hesitant sounds that typify speech disfluency (or should that be 'dysfluency'?). Someone on the Spanish talk page has - I think rightly - asked if such stuff is relevant to the topic. The Czech version likewise contains a list of words and phrases such as 'like', 'to tell you the truth' and 'if you please'. The problem with such lists is that you can keep adding to them forever, as individual speakers have their own pet expressions. In the end you can't see the wood for the trees!213.127.210.95 (talk) 13:57, 27 August 2016 (UTC)