Jump to content

User:Apeloza/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Apeloza (talk | contribs) at 02:53, 7 March 2013. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Spelling To Sound Consistency in Reading

Spelling to sound consistency (also known as spelling to sound regularity) is a phenomenon studied in Cognitive Science in which words that are defined as consistent are easier to access in our memory. Consistency is one of many properties of words (including things like word length and frequency) that changes how quickly and accurately we read[1]. A word which is consistent is one in which the body of a word (also known as the rime) only has one form of pronunciation (example: -at in Hat, Cat, Bat, Mat, etcetera). Similarly, a word is inconsistent if the body of the word has more than one way for it to be pronounced. (e.g. HAVE is not consistent with GAVE or SAVE). There are two models that both seek to explain this phenomenon, listed below.


Dual-Route Cascade Model and Parallel Distributed Processing Model

The Dual-Route Cascade Model (shortened to DRC) explains that there are two types of words: irregular words and regular words. Regular words follow something known as grapheme-to-phoneme rules (shortened to GPC), while irregular words do not [2]. From these two types of words, two paths for reading emerge. The first path is the direct route which is what we use when we 'sound out' words, and this is used for irregular words. The second path is the indirect route which is for words that follow GPC rules. In this indirect route the individiual graphemes are turned into phonemes using the GPC rules, in a sense a 'shortcut' which allows for faster processing time.

The Parallel Distributed Processing Model (shortened to PDP) has a different explanation for how we read. The PDP model emphasizes a connectionist approach[3]. Past information influences future system processing for reading. Put simply, each unit of spelling or sound has a connection and those that are most typical are most likely to activate.

Regardless of the model used to interpret spelling to sound consistency, both agree that regular words are simpler for us to recall and consequently faster to read.


High-Frequency and Low-Frequency Words

Spelling-to-sound consistency has been thought to only apply to low-frequency words -- words which are not encountered commonly in one's day to day life. For high-frequency words or words which are encountered commonly in day to day life (example: through) there is little to no change in their recall time. This can be explained through the Dual-Route Cascade model mentioned above: high frequency words with low spelling-to-sound consistency actually travel through the indirect route as they are firmly entrenched in memory and do not need to be 'sounded out'. Through the Parallel Distributed Processing Model this could be explained as the high-frequency words having a large number of exposures which eliminates any corrupting influence similarly spelled (but differently pronounced) words might exert. For low-frequency words this elimination of corrupting influences is not there.

There is some disagreement that spelling-to-sound consistency does not affect high-frequency words. One argument is that high-frequency words are merely not inconsistent or irregular enough to produce an effect. This can be explained through the number of 'friends' a word has (words which are pronounced the same and structured similarly, example: hat, cat). and the number of 'enemies' a word has (words which are pronounced differently and structured similarly, example: HAVE and GAVE). In studies that examine spelling-sound consistency the high-frequency words that are used tend to have a higher friends to enemies ratio than the low-frequency words. It has been found in at least one study that high-frequency words can also exhibit the spelling-to-sound consistency effect if the amount of friends and enemies as well as the types of friends and enemies (example: high-frequency enemies, low-frequency friends) are controlled to be even across both sets of words. However the effect is still larger for low-frequency words.

Other Languages

The spelling-to-sound consistency effect can be observed in other languages besides English. Despite differences in phonology and spelling rules the effects can still be seen, though they might manifest differently. In French the shift from spelling to phonology (pronunciation) is fairly consistent (at least more-so than English), but the shift from phonology to spelling is inconsistent. This is a different form of inconsistency which can be described as feedback inconsistent whereas traditional inconsistency can be described as feedforward inconsistent. In fact, 79.1% of monosyllabic French words are feedback inconsistent with only 12.4% being feedforward inconsistent, contrasted to the English statistics: 76% are feedback inconsistent with 33% being feedforward inconsistent.

Controversy

This will be a specific section dedicated to discussing the debates regarding spelling to sound consistency (e.g. how it interacts with other variables). This section will also discuss some limitations of the research in general.

Present and Future

This section will talk about the very current developments in the research on spelling to sound consistency and the directions it is taking.

References

[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]

  1. ^ Lee, C. (2008). Rethinking of the Regularity and Consistency Effects in Reading. Language and Linguistics, 9(1), 177-186.
  2. ^ filler
  3. ^ filler
  4. ^ Andrews, S., Woollams, A., & Bond, R.(2005). Spelling-sound typicality only affects words with digraphs: Further qualifications to the generality of the regularity effect on word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 567-593.
  5. ^ Bauer, D. & Stanovich, K. (1980). Lexical access and the spelling-to-sound regularity effect. Memory & Cognition, 8(5), 424-432.
  6. ^ Bosman, A., van Hell, J., & Verhoeven, L. (2006) Learning the Spelling of Strange Words in Dutch Benefits From Regularized Reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 879-890.
  7. ^ Burt, J. & Blackwell, P. (2008). Sound-spelling consistency in adults' orthographic learning. Journal of Research in Reading, 31(1), 77-96.
  8. ^ Chateau, D. & Jared, D. (2003) Spelling-sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 255-280.
  9. ^ Cortese, M., Balota, D., Sergent-Marshall, S., & Buckner, R. (2003). Spelling via semantics and phonology: exploring the effects of age, Alzheimer's disease, and primary semantic impairment. Neuropsychologia, 41, 952-967.
  10. ^ Fiez, J., Balota, D., Raichle, M., & Petersen, S. (1999). Effects of Lexicality, Frequency, and Spelling-to-Sound Consistency on the Functional Anatomy of Reading. Neuron, 24, 205-218.
  11. ^ Goswami, U., Ziegler, J., & Richardson, U. (2005). The effects of spelling consistency on phonological awareness: A comparison of English and German. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92, 345-365.
  12. ^ Jared, D. (1997). Spelling-Sound Consistency Affects the Naming of High-Frequency Words. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 505-529.
  13. ^ Kessler, B. & Treiman, R. (2003). Is English Spelling Chaotic? Misconceptions Concerning Its Irregularity. Reading Psychology, 24, 267-289.
  14. ^ Lee, C. (2008). Rethinking of the Regularity and Consistency Effects in Reading. Language and Linguistics, 9(1), 177-186.
  15. ^ Monaghan, J. & Ellis, A. (2002). What Exactly Interacts With Spelling-Sound Consistency in Word Naming? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 28(1), 183-206.
  16. ^ Strain, E., Patterson, K., & Seidenberg, M. (2002). Theories of Word Naming Interact with Spelling-Sound Consistency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(1), 207-214.
  17. ^ Ziegler, J., Jacobs, M., & Stone, G. (1996). Statistical analysis of the bidirectional inconsistency of spelling and sound in French. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28(4), 504-515.
  18. ^ Jared, D. (2002). Spelling-Sound Consistency and Regularity Effects in Word Naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(4), 723-750.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Apeloza/sandbox&oldid=542500022"