{"title":"Differentiation of radical processing strategies in character decoding by L2 learners of Chinese according to L1-type","authors":"Clay Williams, Yuko Uchima","doi":"10.1515/glochi-2020-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study investigates the productive use of semantic and phonetic radicals for Chinese character decoding by Chinese as a foreign language (CFL) learners at different levels of L2 proficiency, focusing on the application of radical knowledge according to the learners’ L1 language families. Using a pseudo-word test developed by Williams, Clay. 2014. The development of intra-character radical awareness in L1 Chinese children: Changing strategies. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 49(2). 1–26 to measure subject preference for semantic versus phonological decoding processes, subjects are asked to match a provided definition and pronunciation with a character in a multiple choice format which included two pseudo characters designed with radicals which corresponded with the provided definition or pronunciation, respectively. The results demonstrate that reliance on semantic or phonological radicals for character identification varies according to the L1 of the CFL learners; subjects whose L1 is relatively orthographically transparent predominantly make use of phonological processing strategies at all levels of proficiency, whereas those whose L1 are more orthographically opaque demonstrate more malleable processing preferences, with relatively strong semantic radical reliance in the early stage of their language learning, and considerable variability between semantic and phonological processing at intermediate and advanced proficiency levels. The findings suggest that developmental trends of using radical decoding strategies differ among CFL learner groups with varying L1 literacy strategy preferences.","PeriodicalId":12769,"journal":{"name":"环球中医药","volume":"34 1","pages":"313 - 331"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"环球中医药","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/glochi-2020-0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the productive use of semantic and phonetic radicals for Chinese character decoding by Chinese as a foreign language (CFL) learners at different levels of L2 proficiency, focusing on the application of radical knowledge according to the learners’ L1 language families. Using a pseudo-word test developed by Williams, Clay. 2014. The development of intra-character radical awareness in L1 Chinese children: Changing strategies. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 49(2). 1–26 to measure subject preference for semantic versus phonological decoding processes, subjects are asked to match a provided definition and pronunciation with a character in a multiple choice format which included two pseudo characters designed with radicals which corresponded with the provided definition or pronunciation, respectively. The results demonstrate that reliance on semantic or phonological radicals for character identification varies according to the L1 of the CFL learners; subjects whose L1 is relatively orthographically transparent predominantly make use of phonological processing strategies at all levels of proficiency, whereas those whose L1 are more orthographically opaque demonstrate more malleable processing preferences, with relatively strong semantic radical reliance in the early stage of their language learning, and considerable variability between semantic and phonological processing at intermediate and advanced proficiency levels. The findings suggest that developmental trends of using radical decoding strategies differ among CFL learner groups with varying L1 literacy strategy preferences.