Yang Jianfeng, Shu Hua, McCandliss Bruce D, Zevin Jason D
Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
State Key laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China.
Biling (Camb Engl). 2013 Apr;16(Spec Iss 2):354-366. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000296.
Learning to read any language requires learning to map among print, sound and meaning. Writing systems differ in a number of factors that influence both the ease and rate with which reading skill can be acquired, as well as the eventual division of labor between phonological and semantic processes. Further, developmental reading disability manifests differently across writing systems, and may be related to different deficits in constitutive processes. Here we simulate some aspects of reading acquisition in Chinese and English using the same model architecture for both writing systems. The contribution of semantic and phonological processing to literacy acquisition in the two languages is simulated, including specific effects of phonological and semantic deficits. Further, we demonstrate that similar patterns of performance are observed when the same model is trained on both Chinese and English as an "early bilingual." The results are consistent with the view that reading skill is acquired by the application of statistical learning rules to mappings among print, sound and meaning, and that differences in the typical and disordered acquisition of reading skill between writing systems are driven by differences in the statistical patterns of the writing systems themselves, rather than differences in cognitive architecture of the learner.
学习阅读任何一种语言都需要学会在印刷文字、声音和意义之间建立映射关系。书写系统在诸多因素上存在差异,这些因素既影响阅读技能习得的难易程度和速度,也影响语音和语义处理过程最终的分工。此外,发展性阅读障碍在不同书写系统中的表现有所不同,并且可能与构成过程中的不同缺陷有关。在此,我们使用相同的模型架构对中文和英文的阅读习得的某些方面进行模拟。模拟了语义和语音处理对这两种语言读写能力习得的贡献,包括语音和语义缺陷的具体影响。此外,我们还证明,当同一个模型作为“早期双语者”同时接受中文和英文训练时,会观察到相似的表现模式。这些结果与以下观点一致,即阅读技能是通过将统计学习规则应用于印刷文字、声音和意义之间的映射关系而习得的,并且书写系统之间阅读技能典型习得和紊乱习得的差异是由书写系统本身的统计模式差异驱动的,而非学习者认知结构的差异。