{"title":"Eye-tracking as a window into assembled phonology in native and non-native reading","authors":"Katherine I. Martin, Alan Juffs","doi":"10.1075/JSLS.19026.MAR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The past 30 years of reading research has confirmed the importance of bottom-up processing. Rather than a\n psycholinguistic guessing game (Goodman, 1967), reading is dependent on rapid, accurate\n recognition of written forms. In fluent first language (L1) readers, this is seen in the automatic activation of a word’s\n phonological form, impacting lexical processing (Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Rayner, Sereno, Lesch & Pollatsek, 1995). Although the influence of phonological form\n is well established, less clear is the extent to which readers are sensitive to the possible pronunciations of a\n word (Lesch & Pollatsek, 1998), derived from the varying consistency of\n grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) (e.g., although ‘great’ has only one pronunciation, [ɡɹeɪt], the grapheme \n within it has multiple possible pronunciations: [i] in [plit] ‘pleat’, [ɛ] in [bɹɛθ] ‘breath’; Parkin, 1982). Further, little is known about non-native readers’ sensitivity to such characteristics. Non-native\n readers process text differently from L1 readers (Koda & Zehler, 2008; McBride-Chang, Bialystok, Chong & Li, 2004), with implications for understanding L2\n reading comprehension (Rayner, Chace, Slattery & Ashby, 2006). The goal of this\n study was thus to determine whether native and non-native readers are sensitive to the consistency of a word’s component GPCs\n during lexical processing and to compare this sensitivity among readers from different L1s.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JSLS.19026.MAR","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
The past 30 years of reading research has confirmed the importance of bottom-up processing. Rather than a
psycholinguistic guessing game (Goodman, 1967), reading is dependent on rapid, accurate
recognition of written forms. In fluent first language (L1) readers, this is seen in the automatic activation of a word’s
phonological form, impacting lexical processing (Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Rayner, Sereno, Lesch & Pollatsek, 1995). Although the influence of phonological form
is well established, less clear is the extent to which readers are sensitive to the possible pronunciations of a
word (Lesch & Pollatsek, 1998), derived from the varying consistency of
grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) (e.g., although ‘great’ has only one pronunciation, [ɡɹeɪt], the grapheme
within it has multiple possible pronunciations: [i] in [plit] ‘pleat’, [ɛ] in [bɹɛθ] ‘breath’; Parkin, 1982). Further, little is known about non-native readers’ sensitivity to such characteristics. Non-native
readers process text differently from L1 readers (Koda & Zehler, 2008; McBride-Chang, Bialystok, Chong & Li, 2004), with implications for understanding L2
reading comprehension (Rayner, Chace, Slattery & Ashby, 2006). The goal of this
study was thus to determine whether native and non-native readers are sensitive to the consistency of a word’s component GPCs
during lexical processing and to compare this sensitivity among readers from different L1s.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.