The written
language (orthography) of English is considered opaque because the letters in a
word don’t always correspond to the sounds of that word when spoken. Of course,
the word ‘AND’ is transparent: It has three letters, each of which correspond
as expected to the common sounds those letters make. But, the word ‘WERE’ is
opaque: The letters don’t correspond all that well to the sounds in the spoken
word. There are lots of these ‘irregular words’ in English writing, so English
orthography is considered opaque. Importantly, opaque orthographies are
difficult to read because the words on the page don’t always predict the
sounds in the word, AND spell because the sounds you want to write might
correspond to different possible letter patterns. As would be expected, then,
many studies demonstrate that English children who have difficulty reading,
also have difficulty spelling.
German
orthography, on the other hand, is considered transparent because the letters
in the written words correspond well to the sounds of that word when spoken.
That makes reading easier: You can sound out the corresponding sounds in the
written word to decode the word. Nevertheless, there can be different ways to
spell a sound in German (e.g., /ee/ can be spelled ‘ee’ or ‘eh’). As a result,
spelling requires more processing of the individual sounds in a word, or more phonological processing. Branderburg et al. reasoned that reading and
spelling problems may not always co-occur in German children, and that
different impairments might be associated with different cognitive processes.
The
researchers compared the performance of 3rd grade children with
either reading disorder, spelling disorder, reading and spelling disorder, or
no reading and spelling disorder (control group) on measures tapping
phonological processing (short-term memory; speaking rate) or working memory
(the ability to store and process phonological information). The results
revealed phonological short-term memory impairments in children with spelling
disorder compared to the control group, and working memory impairments in
children with reading disorder compared to the control group.
The results
provide further support for the important role of phonological processing in
supporting literacy, especially when there is some ambiguity in the
correspondence between letters and sounds. The findings also highlight the cognitive
demands of reading possibly related to supporting reading comprehension
processes.
Blogger: Lisa Archibald
No comments:
Post a Comment