Goswami U
University of Cambridge, England.
J Exp Child Psychol. 1990 Apr;49(2):323-40. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(90)90062-d.
Recent work has demonstrated that children can use orthographic analogies between the spelling patterns in words to help in decoding new words (e.g., using beak to read peak; Goswami, 1986, 1988). However, one objection has been that these analogy effects may be due to phonological priming. Two experiments examined the phonological priming alternative. In Experiment 1, a single word reading task compared the use of analogies to read words that shared both orthography and phonology (e.g., most-post), that shared orthography only (e.g., most-cost), or that shared phonology only (e.g. most-toast--the phonological priming condition). Limited effects of phonological priming were found. Experiment 2 then presented the same words embedded in prose passages--"real reading." While the orthographic analogy effect remained robust, the small phonological priming effect disappeared. It is argued that phonological priming is an insufficient explanation of the analogy effect at the single word level, and plays no role in the use of analogies in story reading.
近期的研究表明,儿童能够利用单词拼写模式之间的正字法类比来帮助解码新单词(例如,用beak来读peak;戈斯瓦米,1986年,1988年)。然而,有一种反对观点认为,这些类比效应可能是由于语音启动。两项实验检验了语音启动这一替代解释。在实验1中,一项单词阅读任务比较了利用类比来阅读同时共享正字法和语音的单词(例如,most-post)、仅共享正字法的单词(例如,most-cost)或仅共享语音的单词(例如,most-toast——语音启动条件)的情况。研究发现语音启动的影响有限。实验2随后将相同的单词嵌入散文段落中——即“真实阅读”。虽然正字法类比效应仍然很强,但微小的语音启动效应消失了。有人认为,语音启动不足以解释单个单词层面的类比效应,并且在故事阅读中使用类比时不起作用。