1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Written Language & Literacy
  4. Volume 22, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 22, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6732
  • E-ISSN: 1570-6001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Orthographic depth, the degree of spelling-to-sound consistency in a language, has been hypothesized to affect the ease with which children learn to read words. However, the relationship between orthographic depth and reading comprehension is less well understood. In this study, focusing on countries in which two international assessments (PISA and PIRLS) were given in two or more languages, we examine data from elementary and high-school readers of Finnish, Swedish, Italian, German, Dutch, French and English). Findings suggest that that there may be some trade-offs between shallow and deep orthographies in terms of the specific ways that they map onto the phonological and deep meaning representations required for cognitive processing during an activity such as comprehension. These trade-offs serve to differentially support or inhibit readers depending on where they are situated on the achievement continuum.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
2019-11-20
2023-05-30

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikens, N. L., & Barbarin, O.
    (2008) SES differences in reading trajectories: The contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 235–251. doi:  10.1037/0022‑0663.100.2.235
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.235 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aro, M., & Wimmer, H.
    (2003) Learning to read: English in comparison to six more regular orthographies. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 621–635. doi:  10.1017/S0142716403000316
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000316 [Google Scholar]
  3. Arya, D., McClung, N. A., Katznelson, N., & Scott, L.
    (2015) Language ideologies and literacy achievement: Six multilingual countries and two international assessments. International Journal of Multilingualism, 13(1), 40–60. 10.1080/14790718.2015.1021352
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1021352 [Google Scholar]
  4. August, D., Shanahan, T., & Escamilla, K.
    (2009) English language learners: Developing literacy in second-language learners – Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Journal of Literacy Research, 41(4), 432–452. 10.1080/10862960903340165
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960903340165 [Google Scholar]
  5. Block, C. C., & Pressley, M.
    (2007) Best practices in teaching comprehension. InL. Gambrell, L. Mandel-Morrow, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Best practices in literacy instruction (pp.220–242). New York: Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Borgwaldt, S. R., Hellwig, F. M., & De Groot, A. M. B.
    (2005) Onset entropy matters: Letter-to-phoneme mappings in seven languages. Reading and Writing, 18, 211–229. doi:  10.1007/s11145‑005‑3001‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-005-3001-9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cadime, I., Rodrigues, B., Santos, S., Viana, F. L., Chaves-Sousa, S., do Céu Cosme, M., & Ribeiro, I.
    (2017) The role of word recognition, oral reading fluency and listening comprehension in the simple view of reading: a study in an intermediate depth orthography. Reading and Writing, 30(3), 591–611. 10.1007/s11145‑016‑9691‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9691-3 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cervetti, G., Hiebert, F., Pearson, P. D., McClung, N. A.
    (2015) Factors that influence the difficulty of science words. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(2), 153–185. 10.1177/1086296X15615363
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X15615363 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chomsky, N., & Halle, M.
    (1968) The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Daniels, P. T., & Share, D. L.
    (2018) Writing system variation and its consequences for reading and dyslexia. Scientific Studies of Reading, 22(1), 101–116. 10.1080/10888438.2017.1379082
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2017.1379082 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ercikan, K., and Koh, K.
    (2005) Examining the construct comparability of the English and French versions of TIMSS, International Journal of Testing, 5 (1), 23–35. 10.1207/s15327574ijt0501_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0501_3 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fleischman, H., Hopstock, P., Pelczar, M., & Shelley, B.
    (2010) Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of U.S. 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy in an international context (NECS 2011–004). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Florit, E., & Cain, K.
    (2011) The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies?. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 553–576. 10.1007/s10648‑011‑9175‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9175-6 [Google Scholar]
  14. Frankel, K., Becker, B., Rowe, M., & Pearson, P. D.
    (2016) From what is reading to what is literacy?Journal of Education196(3), 7–17. 10.1177/002205741619600303
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741619600303 [Google Scholar]
  15. Frost, R.
    (2005) Orthographic systems and skilled word recognition processes in reading. InM. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp.272–295). doi:  10.1002/9780470757642.ch15
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757642.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  16. Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S.
    (1987) Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104–115. doi:  10.1037/0096‑1523.13.1.104
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.13.1.104 [Google Scholar]
  17. Frost, R., Kugler, T., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I.
    (2005) Orthographic structure versus morphological structure: principles of lexical organization in a given language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(6), 1293.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Frost, R.
    (2012) Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(5), 263–279. 10.1017/S0140525X11001841
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11001841 [Google Scholar]
  19. Glass, G. V.
    (1976) Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational researcher, 5(10), 3–8. 10.3102/0013189X005010003
     https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X005010003 [Google Scholar]
  20. Goodman, K. S.
    (1967) Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6(4), 126–135. 10.1080/19388076709556976
     https://doi.org/10.1080/19388076709556976 [Google Scholar]
  21. Goswami, U., Porpodas, C. D., & Wheelwright, S.
    (1997) Children’s orthographic representations in English and Greek. Alphabetic Journal of Psychology of Education, 12, 273–292.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E.
    (1986) Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and special education, 7(1), 6–10. 10.1177/074193258600700104
     https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104 [Google Scholar]
  23. Guthrie, J. T., Schafer, W. D., & Huang, C. W.
    (2001) Benefits of opportunity to read and balanced instruction on the NAEP. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 145–162. 10.1080/00220670109599912
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670109599912 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hanley, R., Masterson, J., Spencer, L., & Evans, D.
    (2004) How long do the advantages of learning to read a transparent orthography last? An investigation of the reading skills and reading impairment of Welsh children at 10 years of age. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57(8), 1393–1410. doi:  10.1080/02724980343000819
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000819 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B.
    (1990) The simple view of reading. Reading and writing, 2(2), 127–160. 10.1007/BF00401799
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401799 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hopstock, P., & Pelczar, M.
    (2011) Technical report and user’s guide for the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA): 2009 data files and database with U.S. specific variables (NCES 2011–025). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hutzler, F., Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., Wimmer, H., & Zorzi, M.
    (2004) Do current connectionist learning models account for reading development in different languages?. Cognition, 91(3), 273–296. 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  28. Joncas, M.
    (2007) PIRLS 2006 sample design. InM. Martin, I. Mullis, & A. Kennedy (Eds.), PIRLS 2006 technical report (pp.35–48). Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Joshi, R. M.
    (2018) Simple view of reading (SVR) in different orthographies: Seeing the forest with the trees. InReading and Dyslexia (pp.65–74). Springer, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑90805‑2_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90805-2_4 [Google Scholar]
  30. Joshi, R. M., Ji, X. R., Breznitz, Z., Amiel, M., & Yulia, A.
    (2015) Validation of the simple view of reading in Hebrew – A Semitic language. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(3), 243–252. 10.1080/10888438.2015.1010117
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2015.1010117 [Google Scholar]
  31. Katz, L., & Frost, R.
    (1992) The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. InR. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp.67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers. 10.1016/S0166‑4115(08)62789‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62789-2 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kintsch, W.
    (1998) Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Landerl, K.
    (2000) Influences of orthographic consistency and reading instruction on the development of nonword reading skills. Alphabetic Journal of Psychology of Education, 7, 239–257. doi:  10.1007/BF03173177
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173177 [Google Scholar]
  34. Languages across Europe
    Languages across Europe (2011) BBC News Online country profile: Belgium. Retrieved fromwww.bbc.co.uk/languages/Alphabetic_languages/countries/belgium.shtml
  35. Lervåg, A., & Aukrust, V. G.
    (2010) Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension growth between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(5), 612–620. doi:  10.1111/j.1469‑7610.2009.02185.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Logan, S., & Johnston, R.
    (2009) Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: Examining where these differences lie. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(2), 199–214. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9817.2008.01389.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.01389.x [Google Scholar]
  37. Martin, M., Mullis, I., & Kennedy, A.
    (Eds.) (2007) PIRLS 2006 technical report. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. McBride-Chang, C., Cho, J. R., Liu, H., Wagner, R. K., Shu, H., Zhou, A., … & Muse, A.
    (2005) Changing models across cultures: Associations of phonological awareness and morphological structure awareness with vocabulary and word recognition in second graders from Beijing, Hong Kong, Korea, and the United States. Journal of experimental child psychology, 92(2), 140–160. 10.1016/j.jecp.2005.03.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2005.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mullis, I., Kennedy, A., Martin, M., & Sainsbury, M.
    (2006) PIRLS 2006 assessment framework and specifications, 2nd edition. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Niessen, M., Frith, U., Reitsma, P., & Öhngren, B.
    (2000) Learning disorders as a barrier to human development 1995–1999. Evaluation report. Technical Committee COST Social Sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Perfetti, C. A., & Harris, L. N.
    (2013) Universal reading processes are modulated by language and writing system. Language Learning and Development, 9(4), 296–316. 10.1080/15475441.2013.813828
     https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2013.813828 [Google Scholar]
  42. OECD
    OECD (2012) PISA 2009 Technical Report, PISA, OECD Publishing. 10.1787/9789264167872‑en
     https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264167872-en [Google Scholar]
  43. Öney, B., & Goldman, S.
    (1984) Decoding and comprehension skills in Turkish and English: Effects of the regularity of grapheme-phoneme correspondences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 557–567. doi:  10.1037/0022‑0663.76.4.557
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.557 [Google Scholar]
  44. Patel, T. K., Snowling, M. J., & de Jong, P. F.
    (2004) A Cross-Linguistic Comparison of Children Learning to Read in English and Dutch. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 785–797. doi:  10.1037/0022‑0663.96.4.785
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.785 [Google Scholar]
  45. Pearson, P. D., & Cervetti, G. N.
    (2015) Fifty years of reading comprehension theory and practice. InP. D. Pearson & E. H. Hiebert. Research-based practices for teaching Common Core literacy (pp.1–39). New York: Teachers College Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Peereman, R., & Content, A.
    (1998) Quantitative analyses of orthography to phonology mapping in English and French, Available from: homepages.ulb.ac.be/~acontent/OPMapping.html
  47. Perfetti, C. A.
    (1992) The representation problem in reading acquisition. InP. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp.145–174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. (2003) The universal grammar of reading. Scientific studies of reading, 7(1), 3–24. 10.1207/S1532799XSSR0701_02
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532799XSSR0701_02 [Google Scholar]
  49. Perfetti, C.
    (2007) Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. doi:  10.1080/10888430701530730
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730 [Google Scholar]
  50. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J.
    (2014) Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 22–37. 10.1080/10888438.2013.827687
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.827687 [Google Scholar]
  51. Plaut, D. C., & Gonnerman, L. M.
    (2000) Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to lexical processing?. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 445–485. 10.1080/01690960050119661
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119661 [Google Scholar]
  52. Porpodas, C. D.
    (1999) Patterns of phonological and memory processing in beginning readers and spellers of Greek. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 406–416. doi:  10.1177/002221949903200506
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949903200506 [Google Scholar]
  53. Rabe-Hesketh, S. & Skrondal, A.
    (2005) Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata (Third Edition). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Rau, A. K., Moll, K., Snowling, M. J., & Landerl, K.
    (2015) Effects of orthographic consistency on eye movement behavior: German and English children and adults process the same words differently. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 130, 92–105. 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.09.012 [Google Scholar]
  55. Rau, A. K., Moll, K., Moeller, K., Huber, S., Snowling, M. J., & Landerl, K.
    (2016) Same same, but different: Word and sentence reading in German and English. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(3), 203–219. 10.1080/10888438.2015.1136913
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2015.1136913 [Google Scholar]
  56. Sampson, G.
    (2018) From phonemic spelling to distinctive spelling. Written Language & Literacy, 21(1), 3–25. 10.1075/wll.00008.sam
     https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00008.sam [Google Scholar]
  57. Schmalz, X., Beyersmann, E., Cavalli, E., & Marinus, E.
    (2016) Unpredictability and complexity of print-to-speech correspondences increase reliance on lexical processes: More evidence for the Orthographic Depth Hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28(6), 658–672. 10.1080/20445911.2016.1182172
     https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2016.1182172 [Google Scholar]
  58. Schmalz, X., Marinus, E., Coltheart, M., & Castles, A.
    (2015) Getting to the bottom of orthographic depth. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 22(6), 1614–1629. 10.3758/s13423‑015‑0835‑2
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0835-2 [Google Scholar]
  59. Schmalz, X., Robidoux, S., Castles, A., Coltheart, M., & Marinus, E.
    (2017) German and English bodies: No evidence for cross-linguistic differences in preferred orthographic grain size. Collabra: Psychology, 3(1).
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Seymour, P., Aro, M., & Erskine, J.
    (2003) Foundation literacy acquisition in Alphabetic orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174. doi:  10.1348/000712603321661859
     https://doi.org/10.1348/000712603321661859 [Google Scholar]
  61. Seidenberg, M. S.
    (2011) Reading in different writing systems: One architecture, multiple solutions. InP. McCardle, B. Miller, J. R. Lee, & O. J. L. Tzeng (Eds.), The extraordinary brain series. Dyslexia across languages: Orthography and the brain–gene–behavior link (pp.146–168). Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H Brookes Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Share, D. L.
    (2008) On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: the perils of overreliance on an “outlier” orthography. Psychological bulletin, 134(4), 584. 10.1037/0033‑2909.134.4.584
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.584 [Google Scholar]
  63. Sprenger-Charolles, L.
    (2003) Reading acquisition: Cross linguistic data. InT. Nunes, & P. Bryant (Eds.), Handbook of children’s literacy (pp.43–66). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Statistics Canada
    Statistics Canada (2008) Canadian demographics at a glance (Catalogue No. 91-003-X). Retrieved fromwww.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-003-x/91-003-x2007001-eng.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Taha, H., & Saiegh-Haddad, E.
    (2017) Morphology and spelling in Arabic: Development and interface. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(1), 27–38. 10.1007/s10936‑016‑9425‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-016-9425-3 [Google Scholar]
  66. Thorstad, G.
    (1991) The effect of orthography and the acquisition of literacy skills. British Journal of Psychology, 82, 527–537. doi:  10.1111/j.2044‑8295.1991.tb02418.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02418.x [Google Scholar]
  67. Tunmer, W. E., & Chapman, J. W.
    (2012) Does set for variability mediate the influence of vocabulary knowledge on the development of word recognition skills?Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 122–140. doi:  10.1080/10888438.2010.542527
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.542527 [Google Scholar]
  68. UNESCO
    UNESCO (2006) International Standard Classification of Education, ISCED 1997. Paris: UNESCO Institute of Statistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. van Daal, V. H., & Wass, M.
    (2017) First-and second-language learnability explained by orthographic depth and orthographic learning: A “natural” Scandinavian experiment. Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(1), 46–59. 10.1080/10888438.2016.1251437
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2016.1251437 [Google Scholar]
  70. Venezky, R.
    (1999) The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. New York: Guilford.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Venezky, R. L.
    (2004) In search of the perfect orthography. Written Language & Literacy, 7(2), 139–163.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Wu, M.
    (2005) The role of plausible values in large-scale surveys. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31, 114–128. doi:  10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.005 [Google Scholar]
  73. Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U.
    (2005) Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological bulletin, 131(1), 3–29. 10.1037/0033‑2909.131.1.3
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  74. (2006) Becoming literate in different languages: similar problems, different solutions. Developmental science, 9(5), 429–436. 10.1111/j.1467‑7687.2006.00509.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00509.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
Loading
Reading comprehension across languages
Written Language & Literacy 22, 33 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00019.mcc
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): comprehension; cross-linguistic; orthographic depth; reading competence

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error