Am I the only one who thinks there is confusion on this? While I think I have a pretty solid definition in my mind about what I mean when I say “phonology” or when I say “articulation” I get the feeling that in the field there is some general confusion or blurring of lines between the two when I talk to other clinicians. (And I’m not even adding in the confusion I see regarding childhood apraxia of speech into this.)

According to ASHA (on this page): “An articulation disorder involves problems making sounds. Sounds can be substituted, left off, added or changed.”

Also, according to ASHA (also on this page): “A phonological process disorder involves patterns of sound errors. For example, substituting all sounds made in the back of the mouth like “k” and “g” for those in the front of the mouth like “t” and “d” (e.g., saying “tup” for “cup” or “das” for “gas”).”

Well, that doesn’t really clear it up.  Let’s recap:

  • Articulation: sounds can be substituted
  • Phonology: for example, substituting all sounds made in the back of the mouth like “k” for “t”
  • Articulation: sounds can be left off
  • Phonology: final or initial consonant deletion anyone?

The slight difference between the two definition appears to be in how they start.  An articulation disorder is “problems making sounds” (but not to be confused with childhood apraxia of speech?) while a phonological disorder is “patterns of sound error.”  The articulation disorder definition sounds like a motor problem (the way your lips, tongue, mouth, whatever move to make a sound). The phonological disorder almost sounds like a cognitive representation, i.e., a child is missing a sound or set of sound representations in her/his head and thus makes consistent errors such as replacing /t/ for /k/ or /b/ for /ʃ/or /θ/.

Agree? Disagree? Do you have your own definition of articulation and phonology?  Do you not distinguish between the two at all?  How does it affect how you evaluation and/or how you treat? Why is there this confusion between the two?  Should they be differentiated in the first place?

I do separate them and it does affect how I approach treatment. But that’s a looooong discussion that I plan to break down into several posts. If anyone else wants to chime in, I’d love to hear it.  My perspective is heavily influenced (of course) by what was taught in my graduate school curriculum. I would be interested to hear what others have learned through their own graduate school curriculum and/or reading from the literature.

Advertisement