The Language of Voice: How “Head” and “Chest” Can Pave the Way to Twenty-First-Century Terminology

Abstract

This article asks the central question of language: “why?” If language is a symbolic representation, then why does language become embedded in vocal practice, unable to be dislodged? Why do people war over their language choices? And why do there seem to be too few approaches in the voice field that utilize objective language? As a means to explore these questions, this article will examine vocal registration terminology and seek to discover ways in which traditional language can be redirected into new opportunities for communication. New communication opportunities include scientific research that more objectively defines the object or experience, using questions to discover new ways of describing the object or experience and finding approaches such as filtered listening that eliminate the functional need for language. Ultimately, language as a tool can be most effectively employed if it serves the voice user. Focusing more intently on the object or experience, by contrast to the words that describe that experience, opens vocalists into new ways of thinking and being. The role reversal that comes from new technology allows the vocalist to directly engage with their minds and bodies without the instructor’s leading language and conscious thought acting as a gatekeeper.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.