Sensitivity to morphological spelling regularities in Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals

IF 2 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading and Writing Pub Date : 2024-03-23 DOI:10.1007/s11145-024-10523-w
{"title":"Sensitivity to morphological spelling regularities in Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10523-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Evidence of sensitivity to graphotactic and morphological patterns in English spelling has been extensively examined in monolinguals. Comparatively few studies have examined bilinguals’ sensitivity to spelling regularities. The present study compared late Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals on their sensitivity to systematic inflectional and derivational spelling regularities. One hundred and twenty-nine undergraduate students completed a forced-choice spelling task, in which nonword pairs were presented in a sentence context requiring a choice of the relevant grammatical form. English ability measures were administered to examine possible inter-individual differences in morphological sensitivity. The results showed that both monolingual and bilingual participants demonstrated knowledge of spelling patterns, but the groups differed in their sensitivity to inflectional and derivational spelling regularities. Specifically, bilinguals showed more consistent use of morphological spelling regularities in guiding their decision on spelling choice compared to monolinguals. The results are argued to be consistent with the predictions of statistical learning accounts of spelling acquisition.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading and Writing","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10523-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evidence of sensitivity to graphotactic and morphological patterns in English spelling has been extensively examined in monolinguals. Comparatively few studies have examined bilinguals’ sensitivity to spelling regularities. The present study compared late Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals on their sensitivity to systematic inflectional and derivational spelling regularities. One hundred and twenty-nine undergraduate students completed a forced-choice spelling task, in which nonword pairs were presented in a sentence context requiring a choice of the relevant grammatical form. English ability measures were administered to examine possible inter-individual differences in morphological sensitivity. The results showed that both monolingual and bilingual participants demonstrated knowledge of spelling patterns, but the groups differed in their sensitivity to inflectional and derivational spelling regularities. Specifically, bilinguals showed more consistent use of morphological spelling regularities in guiding their decision on spelling choice compared to monolinguals. The results are argued to be consistent with the predictions of statistical learning accounts of spelling acquisition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
汉英双语者和英语单语者对形态拼写规律的敏感性
摘要 对英语拼写中的图形学和形态学模式的敏感性的证据已经在单语者中进行了广泛的研究。相对而言,很少有研究考察双语者对拼写规律的敏感性。本研究比较了晚期汉英双语者和英语单语者对系统词缀和派生词拼写规律性的敏感性。129名本科生完成了一项强迫选择拼写任务,在该任务中,非词对出现在一个要求选择相关语法形式的句子语境中。他们还进行了英语能力测试,以研究个体间在词形敏感性方面可能存在的差异。结果表明,单语和双语参与者都表现出对拼写模式的了解,但两组对转折词和派生词拼写规律的敏感度不同。具体来说,与单语者相比,双语者在决定拼写选择时更一致地使用形态拼写规律。这些结果与拼写习得的统计学习理论的预测是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
16.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Reading and writing skills are fundamental to literacy. Consequently, the processes involved in reading and writing and the failure to acquire these skills, as well as the loss of once well-developed reading and writing abilities have been the targets of intense research activity involving professionals from a variety of disciplines, such as neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics and education. The findings that have emanated from this research are most often written up in a lingua that is specific to the particular discipline involved, and are published in specialized journals. This generally leaves the expert in one area almost totally unaware of what may be taking place in any area other than their own. Reading and Writing cuts through this fog of jargon, breaking down the artificial boundaries between disciplines. The journal focuses on the interaction among various fields, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Reading and Writing publishes high-quality, scientific articles pertaining to the processes, acquisition, and loss of reading and writing skills. The journal fully represents the necessarily interdisciplinary nature of research in the field, focusing on the interaction among various disciplines, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Coverage in Reading and Writing includes models of reading, writing and spelling at all age levels; orthography and its relation to reading and writing; computer literacy; cross-cultural studies; and developmental and acquired disorders of reading and writing. It publishes research articles, critical reviews, theoretical papers, and case studies. Reading and Writing is one of the most highly cited journals in Education, Educational Research, and Educational Psychology.
期刊最新文献
Subskills and sub-knowledge in Chinese as a second language reading comprehension: a structural equation modeling study Typing /s/—morphology between the keys? Initial validation of the handwriting proficiency screening questionnaire (HPSQ-C) translated to Spanish Understanding narratives in different media formats: Processes and products of elementary-school children’s comprehension of texts and videos Profiling text cohesion in the development of L2 Chinese reading materials: variation by text level and genre
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1