Linguistic constraints on the cross-linguistic variations in L2 word recognition
Reading and Writing, ISSN: 1573-0905, Vol: 35, Issue: 6, Page: 1401-1424
2022
- 4Citations
- 24Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
This study investigated how experience with a first language (L1) writing system affects the development of the second language (L2) word recognition subskills and how L2 linguistic knowledge constrains such L1 impacts. In this study, word recognition is conceptualized as a complex construct that entails multiple subskills necessary for identifying a word based on the linguistic information (phonology and morphology) encoded in its visual form. To capture the complexity of the construct, we measured three word-form analysis skills, including orthographic, grapho-phonological, and grapho-morphological processing subskills. We then compared their relative contributions to word-meaning retrieval and reading comprehension among fifty-two college-level Chinese students who learned English in the U.S. The results demonstrated that while orthographic processing subskills were a significant predictor of word-meaning retrieval, grapho-morphological processing subskills were the only factor contributing to text comprehension. In addition, our data revealed that L2 linguistic knowledge played differential roles in mediating the contribution of the L2 word-form analysis skills to word-meaning retrieval and reading comprehension. These findings suggest that L2 word recognition development is constrained not only by previously acquired reading skills and but also by emerging knowledge of the target language. We discussed how the notion of script relativity encapsulates such complex cross-linguistic interactions among morpho-syllabic Chinese (L1), morpho-phonemic English (L2) writing systems, and L2 linguistic knowledge in L2 word recognition development.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know