Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 463–487 | Cite as

Context effects on heterophonic-homography resolution in learning to read hebrew

  • Amalia Bar-On
  • Elitzur Dattner
  • Dorit Ravid
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The paper examines the role of context in reading unpointed Hebrew, demonstrating the changing nature of reliance on context during the course of reading acquisition. We analyze the reading-aloud of sentences with heterographic-homographic ambiguity, aiming to shed light on the development of ambiguity resolution processes in typically developing schoolaged and adult populations. 171 Hebrew-speaking children and adolescents in seven age/schooling groups (beginning and end of second grade, third, fourth, seventh, and eleventh grade), and a group of adults, participated in the study. Using homographic garden-path and non-Garden-path sentences, we demonstrate the cumulative effect of context as well as processes of monitoring cum reanalysis. Two hypotheses are borne out in the present research: First, context effect is inherent to reading; it is present throughout all age/grade groups, becoming more efficient with age/grade level. Second, monitoring and reanalysis lag far behind context effects, appearing only as age and reading experience increase.

Keywords

Reading development Garden-path Hebrew reading Context-effect Monitoring and reanalysis Ambiguity/homograph resolution 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abu-Rabia, S. (2001). The role of vowels in reading Semitic scripts: Data from Arabic and Hebrew. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14(1), 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bar-On, A. (2010). תפקיד הידע הלשוני והתפתחותו בקריאת העברית הלא מנוקדת (The role of linguistic knowledge in learning to read unpointed Hebrew) (Doctoral dissertation). Israel: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
  3. Bar-On, A. (2015). קריאה בצל ההומוגרפיות: הבעיה היא גם הפתרון (Reading in the shadow of homography: The problem is the solution). Oriyanut VeSafa, 5, 99–120.Google Scholar
  4. Bar-On, A., & Ravid, D. (2011). Morphological decoding in Hebrew pseudowords: A developmental study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 553–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berman, R. A., & Ravid, D. (2009). Becoming a literate language user: Oral and written text construction across adolescence. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 92–111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berman, R. A., & Verhoeven, L. (2002). Cross-linguistic perspectives on the development of text-production abilities: Speech and writing. Written Language & Literacy, 5(1), 1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Booth, J. R., Harasaki, Y., & Burman, D. D. (2006). Development of lexical and sentence level context effects for dominant and subordinate word meanings of homonyms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35(6), 531–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breznitz, Z., & Share, D. L. (1992). Effects of accelerated reading rate on memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(2), 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwella, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42(4), 368–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elman, J. L. (2009). On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science, 33(4), 547–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(1), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frost, R. (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(5), 310–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1997). Attentuating interference during comprehension: The role of suppression. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 37, 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gur, T. (2005). Reading Hebrew vowel diacritics: A longitudinal investigation from grade 1 to grade 3. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. October, 2005. University of Haifa, Isearl.Google Scholar
  15. Häikiö, T., Bertram, R., Hyönä, J., & Niemi, P. (2009). Development of the letter identity span in reading: Evidence from the eye movement moving window paradigm. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102(2), 167–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Häikiö, T., Bertrama, R., & Hyönäa, J. (2010). Development of parafoveal processing within and across words in reading: Evidence from the boundary paradigm. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(10), 1982–1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khannaa, M. M., & Boland, J. E. (2010). Children’s use of language context in lexical ambiguity resolution. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(1), 160–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee, C., & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). Wave-ering: An ERP study of syntactic and semantic context effects on ambiguity resolution for noun/verb homographs. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(4), 538–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leinengera, M., & Raynera, K. (2013). Eye movements while reading biased homographs: Effects of prior encounter and biasing context on reducing the subordinate bias effect. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 665–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morrison, R. E. (1984). Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of saccades. Ournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(5), 667–682.Google Scholar
  21. Nir, R. (1982). כותרות העיתון כיחידות שיח (Newspaper headlines as discourse-units). In S. Blum-Kulka, Y. Tubin, & R. Nir (Eds.), Investigations in discourse analysis (pp. 75–116). Jerusalem: Academon, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  22. Patson, N. D., Darowski, E. S., Moon, N., & Ferreira, F. (2009). Lingering misinterpretations in garden-path sentences: Evidence from a paraphrasing task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(1), 280–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peleg, O., & Eviatar, Z. (2008). Hemispheric sensitivities to lexical and contextual information: Evidence from lexicalambiguity resolution. Brain and Language, 105(2), 71–82.Google Scholar
  24. Peleg, O., & Eviatar, Z. (2012). Understanding written words: Phonological, lexical, and contextual effects in the cerebral hemispheres. In M. Faust (Ed.), The handbook of the neuropsychology of language (pp. 59–76). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perfetti, C. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Perfetti, C. (2003). The universal grammar of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Perfetti, C., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity. Decade of behavior (pp. 67–86). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Perfetti, C., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perfetti, C., & McCutchen, D. (1987). Schooled language competence: Linguistic abilities in reading and writing. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics (Vol. 2, pp. 105–141)., Reading, writing, and language learning Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 22–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ravid, D. (1996). Accessing the mental lexicon: Evidence from incompatibility between representation of spoken and written morphology. Linguistics, 34(6), 1219–1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ravid, D. (2004). Later lexical development in Hebrew: Derivational morphology revisited. In R. A. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence: Psycholinguistic and crosslinguistic perspectives, TILAR (Trends in Language Acquisition Research) series (pp. 53–82). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ravid, D. (2005). Hebrew orthography and literacy. In R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 339–363). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  35. Ravid, D. (2006). Semantic development in textual contexts during the school years: Noun Scale analyses. Journal of Child Language, 33, 791–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ravid, D. (2012). Spelling morphology: The psycholinguistics of Hebrew spelling. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ravid, D., & Berman, R. A. (2009). Developing linguistic register across text types: The case of modern Hebrew. Pragmatics & Cognition, 17(1), 108–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ravid, D., & Berman, R. A. (2010). Developing noun phrase complexity at school age: A text-embedded cross-linguistic analysis. First Language, 30(1), 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ravid, D., & Levie, R. (2010). Hebrew adjectives in later language text production. First Language, 30(1), 27–55.Google Scholar
  40. Ravid, D., & Vered, L. Learning passive forms as lexical items: Later language development in Hebrew. Journal of Child Language. (in press).Google Scholar
  41. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105(1), 125–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schiff, R. (2012). Shallow and deep orthographies in Hebrew: The role of vowelization in reading development for unvowelized scripts. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41(6), 409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schiff, R., Katzir, T., & Shoshan, N. (2013). Reading accuracy and speed of vowelized and unvowelized scripts among dyslexic readers of Hebrew: The road not taken. Annals of Dyslexia, 63, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shany, M., Bar-On, A., & Katzir, T. (2012). Reading different orthographic structures in the shallow-pointed Hebrew script: A cross-grade study in elementary school. Reading and Writing, 25, 1217–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shany, M., Laxman, D., Shalem, S., Bahat, A., & Zieger, T. (2006). Alef ad taf; Manual. [Alef to Taf: Manual.] Tel Aviv, Israel: Mofet Institute.Google Scholar
  47. Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55(2), 151–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72(2), 95–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Share, D. L., & Bar-On, A. (in press). Learning to read a Semitic abjad: The triplex model of Hebrew reading development. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Google Scholar
  50. Share, D. L., & Levin, I. (1999). Learning to read and write in Hebrew. In M. Harris & G. Hatano (Eds.), Learning to read and write: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 89–111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Shimron, J. (1999). The role of vowel signs in Hebrew: Beyond word recognition. Reading and Writing, 11(4), 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shimron, J., & Sivan, T. (1994). Reading proficiency and orthography evidence from Hebrew and English. Language Learning, 44, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Slattery, T. J., Sturt, P., Christianson, K., Yoshida, M., & Ferreira, F. (2013). Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 104–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stanovich, K. E., Nathan, R. G., West, R. F., & Vala-Rossi, M. (1985). Children’s word recognition in context: Spreading activation, expectancy, and modularity. Child Development, 56(6), 1418–1428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tabossi, P., & Sbisà, S. (2001). Methodological issues in the study of lexical ambiguity resolution. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity. Decade of behavior (pp. 11–26). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. West, R. F., Stanovich, K. E., Feeman, D. J., & Cunningham, A. E. (1983). The effect of sentence context on word recognition in second-and sixth-grade children. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(1), 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of Communication DisordersTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  2. 2.The Department of Hebrew LanguageThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  3. 3.The Department of Communication Disorders, School of EducationTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options