Psychological Research

, Volume 60, Issue 3, pp 183–191 | Cite as

Explicit speech segmentation and syllabic onset structure: Developmental trends

Original Article
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Recent applications of the hierarchical theory of the syllable to the development of explicit speech segmentation are critically examined. One particular prediction, that an initial consonant is more easily isolated when it constitutes the complete onset of a syllable than when it is part of a cluster onset, was tested on children with grade levels ranging from kindergarten to second grade. At each level, two independent groups of children worked with either CVCC (first consonant complete onset) or CCVC (part of cluster onset) syllables. First- and second-graders performed better on the CVCC than on the CCVC material in an initial consonant deletion task, but not when the task was comparison on the basis of that consonant. With the same instructions as the older children, kindergarten children performed at floor level on both tasks with both materials. However, in a new experiment in which the deletion task was presented as a puppet game, and with pretraining and selection on vowel deletion, a significantly higher level of success was achieved by the children working with the CVCC material. These results are consistent with the notion of developmental precedence of onset segmentation on phoneme segmentation. On the other hand, the results of the first and second graders show that onset superiority is not specific for the pre-reading stage.

Keywords

Grade Level Independent Group Recent Application Floor Level Kindergarten Child 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alegria, J., & Morais, J. (1979). Le développement de l'habileté d'analyse phonétique de la parole et l'apprentissage de la lecture. Archives de Psychologie, 183, 251–270.Google Scholar
  2. Bertelson, P. (1986). The onset of literacy: Liminal remarks. Cognition, 24, 1–30. (Reprinted in Bertelson, 1987)Google Scholar
  3. Bertelson, P. (Ed.). (1987). The onset of literacy: Cognitive processes in reading acquisition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bertelson, P. (1993). Reading acquisition and phonemic awareness testing: How conclusive are data from Down's syndrome? (Remarks on Cossu, Rossini and Marshall, 1993). Cognition, 48, 281–283.Google Scholar
  5. Bertelson, P., & de Gelder, B. (1989). Learning about reading from illiterates. In A. Galaburda (Ed.), From reading to neurons (pp. 1–23). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bertelson, P., & de Gelder, B. (1991). The emergence of phonological awareness: Comparative approaches. In I. G. Mattingly & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.), Modularity and the motor theory of speech perception (pp. 393–412). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Bertelson, P., de Gelder, B., Tfouni, L. V., & Morais, J. (1989). Metaphonological abilities of adult illiterates: New evidence of heterogeneity. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1, 239–250.Google Scholar
  8. Bertelson, P., Morais, J., Cary, L., & Alegria, J. (1987). Interpreting data from illiterates: Reply to Koopmans. Cognition, 27, 113–115.Google Scholar
  9. Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 271, 746–747.Google Scholar
  10. Bruce, D. J. (1964). The analysis of word sounds by young children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 34, 158–170.Google Scholar
  11. Bruck, M., & Treiman, R. (1990). Phonological awareness and spelling in normal children and dyslexics: The case of initial consonant clusters. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 156–178.Google Scholar
  12. Calfee, R. C., Chapman, R., & Venezky, R. (1972). How a child needs to think to learn to read. In L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Cognition in Learning and Memory (pp. 139–182). New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Content, A., Kolinsky, R., Morais, J., & Bertelson, P. (1986). Phonetic segmentation in prereaders: Effect of corrective information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 49–72.Google Scholar
  14. de Gelder, B. (1990). Phonological awareness, misidentification and multiple identities. In O. Edmonson, C. Feagin, & P. Mülhauser (Eds.), Development and diversity: Linguistic variation across time and space (pp. 483–506). Arlington: University of Texas Publications.Google Scholar
  15. de Gelder, B., Vroomen, J., & Bertelson, P. (1993). The effect of alphabetic reading competence on language representation in bilingual Chinese subjects. Psychological Research, 55, 315–321.Google Scholar
  16. Fudge, E. C. (1969). Syllables. Journal of Linguistics, 5, 253–286.Google Scholar
  17. Goldsmith, J. (1990). Autosegmental and metrical phonology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. E. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Gough, P., Ehri, L., & Treiman, R. (Eds.). (1992). Reading acquisition. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Halle, M., & Vergnaud, J.-R. (1980). Three-dimensional phonology. Journal of Linguistic Research, 1, 83–105.Google Scholar
  21. Kirtley, C., Bryant, P. E., MacLean, M., & Bradley, L. (1989). Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 224–243.Google Scholar
  22. Knafle, J. D. (1974). Children's discrimination of rhyme. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 367–372.Google Scholar
  23. Lenel, J. C., & Cantor, J. H. (1981). Rhyme recognition and phonemic perception in young children. Journal of Psycho linguistic Research, 10, 57–68.Google Scholar
  24. Levelt, W. G. M. (1980). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  25. Liberman, I. Y., Shankweiler, D., Fisher, F. W., & Carter, B. (1974). Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 201–212.Google Scholar
  26. Lundberg, I., Olofsson, A., & Wall, S. (1980). Reading and spelling skills in the first school years predicted from phonemic awareness skills in kindergarten. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 21, 159–173.Google Scholar
  27. MacLean, M., Bryant, P. E., & Bradley, L. (1987). Rhymes, nursery rhymes and reading in early childhood. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 255–282.Google Scholar
  28. Mann, V. (1986). Phonological awareness: The role of reading experience. Cognition, 24, 65–92. (Reprinted in Bertelson, 1987)Google Scholar
  29. Morais, J., Alegria, J., & Content, A. (1987). The relationship between segmental analysis and alphabetic literacy: An interactive view. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 7, 415–438.Google Scholar
  30. Morais, J., Bertelson, P., Cary, L., & Alegria, J. (1986). Literacy training and speech segmentation. Cognition, 24, 45–64. (Reprinted in Bertelson, 1987)Google Scholar
  31. Morais, J., Cary, L., Alegria, J. & Bertelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7, 323–331.Google Scholar
  32. Morais, J., Cluytens, M., & Alegria, J. (1984). Segmentation abilities of dyslexics and normal readers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 58, 221–222.Google Scholar
  33. Read, C. A., Zhang, Y., Nie, H., & Ding, B. (1986). The ability to manipulate speech sounds depends on knowing alphabetic reading. Cognition, 24, 31–44. (Reprinted in Bertelson, 1987).Google Scholar
  34. Rosner, J., & Simon, D. P. (1971). The auditory analysis task: An initial report. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Learning and Development Center.Google Scholar
  35. Seymour, P. H., & Evans, H. M. (1994). Levels of phonological awareness and learning to read. Reading and Writing, 6, 221–250.Google Scholar
  36. Stanovich, K. E., Cunningham, A. E., & Cramer, B. (1984). Assessing phonological awareness in kindergarten children: Issues of task comparability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 175–190.Google Scholar
  37. Treiman, R. (1985). Onsets and rimes as units of spoken syllables: Evidence from children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 161–181.Google Scholar
  38. Treiman, R. (1987). On the relationship between phonological awareness and literacy. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 7, 524–529.Google Scholar
  39. Treiman, R. (1988). The internal structure of the syllable. In G. N. Carlson & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  40. Treiman, R. (1992). The role of intrasyllabic units in learning to read and spell. In P. Gough, P. L. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Treiman, R., & Zukowsky, A. (1991). Levels of phonological awareness. In S. A. Brady & D. P. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes in literacy: A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  42. Yopp, H. K. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 159–177.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire de Psychologie ExpérimentaleUniversité libre de BruxellesBruxellesBelgium
  2. 2.Tilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations