Cover not available

In:Writing Systems, Reading Processes, and Cross-Linguistic Influences: Reflections from the Chinese, Japanese and Korean Languages
Edited by Hye K. Pae
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 7] 2018
► pp. 353–372

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 17
Crosslinguistic influences of script format

L1-derived syllabification in reading L2 English among native Korean readers

Published online: 10 July 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.7.17pae
Abstract
This study investigated cross-linguistic influences of the Korean script’s syllabic format on L2 English word reading. A total of 103 college students participated in two naming experiments in Korea and the U.S. Experiment 1 used Korean graphemes presented in both block (i.e., Hangul printing convention) and left-to-right linear (i.e., English printing convention) formats. Results from Experiment 1 showed that Korean participants were significantly faster in reading Korean graphemes presented in the block format than in the linear format. Experiment 2 utilized English words that appeared to participants as having random spaces but in fact the spaces corresponded to Korean syllabic boundaries (e.g., un der s tan d, 언더스탠드). Results from Experiment 2 revealed that native Korean readers did not show a significant interference effect in reading L2 words that were derived from L1 syllabic boundaries. Findings are interpreted within the context of the Syllabic Autonomy Saliency Hypothesis for Hangul.
Article outline
  • Theoretical background
    • Psycholinguistic grain size theory
  • Role of syllables
  • Korean writing system: Hangul
  • The present study
  • Experiment 1
    • Participants
    • Measure
    • Procedure
  • Results and discussion
    • RQ 1: Korean readers’ performance on typical and atypical formats of words
    • RQ 2: The effect of the articulatory property of the syllable on reading speed
  • Experiment 2
    • Participants
    • Procedure
    • Measure
  • Results and discussion
  • General discussion
  • Future directions
  • Notes
  • References
References (23)
References
Álvarez, C., Cottrell, D., & Afonso, O. (2009). Writing dictated words and picture names: Syllabic boundaries affect execution in Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 205–223. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Álvarez, C. J., Garcia-Saavedra, G. Luque, J. L., & Taft, M. (2017). Syllabic parsing in children: A developmental study using visual word-spotting in Spanish. Journal of Child Language, 44, 380–401.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cole, P., Magnan, A., & Grainger, J. (1999). Syllable-sized units in visual word recognition: Evidence from skilled and beginning readers of French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 507–532. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2015). The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA). Retrieved <[URL]> (August 1, 2015).
Ferrand, L., & New, B. (2003). Syllabic length effects in visual word. Acta Psychologica, 113, 167–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrand, L., Segui, J., & Humphreys, G. (2003). The syllable’s role in word naming. Memory & Cognition, 25, 458–470. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fry, E. B. (2004). 1000 instant words: The most common words for teaching reading, writing, and spelling. Westminster, CA: Teacher Created Resources.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haikio, T., Hyona, J., & Bertram, R. (2015). The role of syllables in word recognition among beginning Finnish readers: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 562–577. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jared, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1990). Naming multisyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 16(1), 92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, R. L., & Eisler, M. E. (2012). The importance of the first and last letters in words during sentence reading. Acta Psychologia, 141, 336–351. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, H. S. (2005). The frequency of modern Korean use. Seoul: National Institute of the Korean Language.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, C. H., & Taft, M. (2009). Are onsets and codas important in processing letter position? A comparison of TL effects in English and Korean. Journal of Memory and Language 60, 530–542. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, C. H., Kwon, Y., Kim, K., & Rastle, K. (2015). Syllable transposition effects in Korean word recognition. Journal Psycholinguistic Research, 44, 309–315. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maionchi-Pino, N., de Cara, B., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2015). Is syllable segmentation developmentally constrained by consonant sonority within syllable boundaries in silent reading? Evidence in French children. Journal of Research in Reading, 38, 226–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pae, H. K. (2012). A psychometric measurement model for adult English language learners: Pearson Test of English Academic. Educational Research and Evaluation, 18, 211–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). The Korean writing system, Hangul, and word processing. In H. K. Pae (Ed.), Writing systems, reading processes, and cross-linguistic influences: Reflections from the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean languages. (pp. 1–21). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pae, H. K., Greenberg, D., & Morris, R. D. (2012). Construct validity and measurement invariance of the PPVT in the performance of struggling adult readers. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9, 152–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M. (1992). The body of the BOSS: Subsyllabic units in the lexical processing of polysyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 1004–1014.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Test of word reading efficiency (TOWRE). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing (CTOPP). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolf, M., & Denckla, M. B. (2005). Rapid automatized naming and rapid alternating stimulus tests (RAN/RAS). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 3–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue