Social Sciences Faculty, Institute of Psychology, University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.
Department of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Dyslexia. 2020 Feb;26(1):18-35. doi: 10.1002/dys.1648.
We aimed to investigate the relationship between reading difficulties in native language (NL: Polish) and English as a foreign language in dyslexia in English and Polish students, respectively, and to develop a model of relations between NL phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, verbal short-term memory, and reading in English. Thirteen English students with dyslexia (ED), 15 without (END) and 16 Polish students with dyslexia (PD) and 16 without (PND) participated. We found that dyslexic deficits and different phoneme-to-grapheme correspondence rules between Polish and English interfered with the accuracy and fluency of word and nonword decoding and word recognition. Whereas END scored higher than PD and PND in all reading measures, ED did not, despite a NL advantage. When compared with PND, ED performed equal in nonword decoding, which depends to a higher degree on phoneme-to-grapheme conversion rather than lexical access. When compared with PD, ED performed equally in nonword fluency, which is most likely a nonscript-dependant skill. More variance in reading was explained by NL than FL factors, even if analogical NL/FL skills predicted a given variable. While in ED and END, these relationships agreed with the literature; in PD and PND, NL phonological awareness was not beneficial for English as a foreign language reading.
我们旨在研究母语(波兰语)阅读困难与英语作为外语在英语和波兰语学生中的阅读障碍之间的关系,并建立一个与母语语音意识、快速自动命名、语词短期记忆和英语阅读相关的关系模型。13 名英语阅读障碍学生(ED)、15 名无阅读障碍的英语学生(END)和 16 名波兰语阅读障碍学生(PD)、16 名无阅读障碍的波兰语学生(PND)参与了研究。我们发现,阅读障碍的缺陷和波兰语与英语之间不同的音素到字母对应规则干扰了单词和非单词解码以及单词识别的准确性和流畅性。虽然 END 在所有阅读测试中的得分都高于 PD 和 PND,但 ED 并没有,尽管它在 NL 方面具有优势。与 PND 相比,ED 在非单词解码方面的表现相同,因为它在更大程度上依赖于音素到字母的转换,而不是词汇检索。与 PD 相比,ED 在非单词流畅性方面的表现相同,这很可能是非脚本依赖的技能。NL 因素比 FL 因素解释了更多的阅读差异,即使类似的 NL/FL 技能预测了给定的变量。虽然在 ED 和 END 中,这些关系与文献一致;在 PD 和 PND 中,NL 语音意识对英语作为外语阅读没有益处。