바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Next
e-Submission

Vol.28 No.1

Citation Share

Do Korean learners of English use spelling-to-sound regularity information during English word recognition?

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2016, v.28 no.1, pp.1-24
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.001




& (2016). Do Korean learners of English use spelling-to-sound regularity information during English word recognition?. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 28(1), 1-24, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.001

Abstract

The present study examined whether Korean learners of English use grapheme-to-phoneme correspondence rule as in native English speakers during English word recognition. In visual word recognition, both word frequency and regularity play a major role in reading speed and reading accuracy. Hence, the purpose of this study was to investigate how spelling-to-sound regularity and word frequency influence performance on explicit reading and silent reading tasks among English second language learners. Previous word recognition studies with English monolinguals have reported word regularity effect, in which regular words(e.g., save) are recognized faster with lower error rates compared to irregular words(e.g., have). Word regularity effect has been widely used as the supporting evidence for dual route model in visual word recognition. In Experiment 1, an explicit reading task(English word naming task) was used to examine the presence of word regularity effect during read-aloud process. In Experiment 2, a silent reading task(lexical decision task) was administered to examine the influence of irregularities in spelling and sound when participants were not required to generate sound information from spellings during English word recognition. Results from Experiment 1 demonstrated a significant interaction between word frequency and regularity, where word frequency effect was significant in all experimental conditions. On the other hand, word regularity effect showed marginal significance in low frequency word condition only. Results from Experiment 2 only revealed a significant word frequency main effect. Overall, these results indicate that Korean English L2 learners also seem to be able to use spelling-to-sound information during English word recognition similar to those of English monolinguals. However, rather than actively making use of this information via phonological(indirect) route, they have the tendency to use lexical(direct) route which is more sensitive to spelling information. The current study re-evaluated the English word regularity effect among Korean learners of English in terms of their use of spelling-to-sound information during English word recognition.

keywords
영어 학습자, 영어단어 재인, 어휘접근, 철자-소리 대응 규칙, 단어 빈도 효과, 단어 규칙성 효과, English L2 learner, English word recognition, lexical access, grapheme-to-phoneme correspondence rule, word frequency effect, word regularity effect

Reference

1.

김성곤 (1995). 국내 영어교육의 문제점과 현장 실무영어의 오류들. 어학연구, 31(1), 1-19.

2.

김지원 (2006). 영어교육의 문제점과 효과적인 학습방법. 영어어문교육, 12(3), 167-186.

3.

남기춘, 신윤경, 이윤형, 황유미, 이재욱, Skrypiczajko, G. (1999). 외국어 단어재인에서의 철자 및 음운 정보처리 특성. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 11(2), 107-130.

4.

박권생 (1996). 한글 단어 재인 과정에서 음운부호의 역할. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 8, 25-44.

5.

박권생 (2003). 단어 의미 파악과 음운부호: 한글 단어 범주판단 과제에서 수집된 증거. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 15(1), 19-37.

6.

박시균 (2004). 한국인 영어학습자의 발음 오류 원인 분석과 교육 방법 모색. 언어학, (40), 113-143.

7.

이광오 (1996). 한글 글자열의 음독과 음운규칙. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 8, 1- 23.

8.

이광오 (2003). 단어인지 수행은 어종에 따라 다를까?. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 15(4), 479-498.

9.

이윤형, 여명선, 남기춘 (2001). 한국인에게서 보이는 영어 단어 길이와 규칙성 효과. 이중언어학, 18, 215-234.

10.

이윤형, 이재욱, 황유미, 정유진, 남기춘 (2000). 한국인의 영어 단어 재인 과정: 단어 규칙성 효과를 중심으로. 외국어 교육, 7(1), 25-44.

11.

이흥수 (2009). 한국 영어교육의 저효율 현상 요인. 한국교육문제연구, 27(1), 1-22.

12.

전종섭 (2005). 유소년기의 다양한 영어 학습 방법이 고급 영어 구사 능력달성에 미치는 장기적 효과에 대한 연구. 영어교육, 60(4), 487-515.

13.

조혜숙, 남기춘 (2002). 실어증 환자에게서 보이는 단어규칙성 효과. 언어청각장애연구, 7(3), 77-94.

14.

태진이, 이창환, 이윤형 (2015). 한국어 시각 단어재인과정에서 음운정보와 표기정보의 역할. 인지과학, 26(1), 1-26.

15.

Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX Lexical Database. (CD-ROM). Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

16.

Balota, D. A., & Ferraro, F. R. (1993). A dissociation of frequency and regularity effects in pronunciation performance across young adults, older adults, and individuals with senile dementia of the Alzheimer type. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 573-592.

17.

Baron, J., & Strawson, C. (1976). Use of orthographic and word-specific knowledge in reading words aloud. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 386-393.

18.

Barron, R. W. (1979). Visual-orthographic and phonological strategies in reading and spelling. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in reading. London, UK: Academic Press.

19.

Bauer, D. W., & Stanoγich, K. E. (1980). Lexical access and the spelling-to-sound regularity effect. Memory & Cognition, 8(5), 424-432.

20.

Berndt, R. S., D’Autrechy, C. L., & Reggia, J. A. (1994). Functional pronunciation units in English words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 977-991.

21.

Berndt, R. S., Reggia, J. A., & Mitchum, C. C. (1987). Empirically derived probabilities for grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19(1), 1-9.

22.

Butler, Y. G., & Hakuta, K. (2004). Bilingualism and second language acquisition. The handbook of bilingualism, 114-144.

23.

Callan, D. E., Tajima, K., Callan, A. M., Kubo, R., Masaki, S., & Akahane-Yamada, R. (2003). Learning-induced neural plasticity associated with improved identification performance after training of a difficult second-language phonetic contrast. Neuroimage, 19(1), 113-124.

24.

Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In Strategies of Information Processing, 151-216.

25.

Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Hallcr, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100(4), 589-608.

26.

Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological review, 108(1), 204-256.

27.

Cortese, M. J., & Simpson, G. B. (2000). “Regularity effects in word naming: What are they?” Memory & Cognition, 28(8), 1269-1276.

28.

Flege, J. E. (1991). Perception and production: The relevance of phonetic input to L2 phonological learning. In T. Huebner and C. A. Ferguson (Eds.), Cross currents in second language acquisition and linguistic theory. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

29.

Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographic depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104-115.

30.

Gottardo, A., Chiappe, P., Siegel, L. S., & Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Patterns of word and nonword processing in skilled and less-skilled readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 465-487.

31.

Hamada, M., & Koda, K. (2008). Influence of first langauge orthographic experience on second language decoding and word learning. Language Learning, 58(1), 1-31.

32.

Hamers, J. F., & Blanc, M. H. (2000). Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge University Press, 6-49.

33.

Hino, Y., & Lupker. S. J. (2000). Effects of word frequency and spelling-to-sound regularity in naming with and without preceding lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(1), 166- 183.

34.

Jared, D. (2002). Spelling-sound consistency and regularity effects in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language 46(4), 723-750.

35.

Jouravlev, O., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2014). Cross-language phonological activation: Evidence from masked onset priming and ERPs. Brain and Language, 134, 11-22.

36.

Kroll, J. F., & Sunderman, G. (2003). Cognitive processes in second language learners and bilinguals: The development of lexical and conceptual representations. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 104-129). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

37.

Kucera, H & Francis, W. N. (1970). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.

38.

Li, W. (2007). Dimensions of bilingualism. In W. Li (Ed.), The Bilingualism Reader (pp. 3-24). London & New York: Routledge.

39.

Lin, C. H., & Collins, P. (2012). The effects of L1 and orthographic regularity and consistency in naming Chinese characters. Reading and Writing, 25(7), 1747-1767.

40.

Mack, M. (1988). Sentence processing by non-native speakers of English: Evidence from the perception of natural and computer- generated anomalous L2 sentences. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 3, 293-316.

41.

Meyer, D. E., & Gutschera, K. (1975). Orthographic versus phonemic processing of printed words. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 6(4), 414-414.

42.

Paap, R. K., McDonald, E. J., Schvaneveldt, W. R., & Noel, W. R. (1987). Frequency and pronounce ability in visually presented naming and lexical decision tasks. Coltheart, Max (Ed), Attention and performance: The psychology of reading, 12, 22-243.

43.

Paap, R. K., & Noel, W. R. (1991). Dual-route models of print to sound: Still a good horse race. Psychology Research, 53(1), 13-24.

44.

Plaut, D. C. (1997). Structure and function in the lexical system: Insights from dstributed mdels of wrd rading and lxical decision. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(5-6), 765-806.

45.

Rubinstein, H., Lewis, S. S., & Rubinstein, M. A. (1971). Evidence for phonemic recoding in visual word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10(6), 645-647.

46.

Seidenberg, M. S. (1985). The time course of information activation and utilization in visual word recognition. Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, 5, 199-252.

47.

Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523-568.

48.

Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Barnes, M. A., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(3), 383-404.

49.

Stanovich, K. E., & Bauer, D. W. (1978). Experiments on the spelling to-sound regularity effect in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 6, 410-415.

50.

Timmer, K., Ganushchak, L. Y., Ceusters, I., & Schiller, N. O. (2014). Second language phonology influences first language word naming. Brain and Language, 133, 14-25.

51.

Venezky, R. (1970). The structure of English orthography. Walter de Gruyter Press.

52.

Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., & Coltheart, M. (2003). Speed of lexical and nonlexical processing in French: The case of the regularity effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(4), 947-953.

53.

Ziegler, J. C., Stone, G. O., & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). What is the pronunciation for -ough and the spelling for /u/? A database for computing feedforward and feedback consistency in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29(4), 600- 618.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy