Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, 22:907 | Cite as

The foundation of literacy skills in Korean: the relationship between letter-name knowledge and phonological awareness and their relative contribution to literacy skills

  • Young-Suk Kim
Article

Abstract

This study examined the relative contribution of letter-name knowledge and phonological awareness to literacy skills and the relationship between letter-name knowledge and phonological awareness, using data from Korean-speaking preschoolers. The results revealed that although both letter-name knowledge and phonological awareness made unique contributions to literacy skills (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling), letter-name knowledge played a more important role than phonological awareness in literacy acquisition in Korean. Letter-name knowledge explained appreciably greater amount of variance and had larger effect sizes in literacy skills. Furthermore, children with greater syllable, body (e.g., segmenting cat into ca-t), and phoneme awareness had higher levels of letter-name knowledge. In particular, children’s syllable awareness and body awareness were positively associated with their letter-name knowledge, even after controlling for children’s phoneme awareness. These results suggest that Korean children’s awareness of larger phonological units (i.e., syllable and body) in addition to phoneme awareness may mediate the relationship between letter-name knowledge and literacy acquisition in Korean, in contrast with previous findings in English that have demonstrated a positive relationship only between phoneme awareness and letter-name knowledge, and the hypothesis that phoneme awareness mediates the relationship between letter-name knowledge and literacy acquisition.

Keywords

Korean Letter-name knowledge Literacy skills Phonological awareness 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Part of this study was supported by a National Science Foundation Dissertation Grant (#0545205) and Harvard Korea Institute’s Min Young-Chul Memorial Summer Travel Fellowship. The author wishes to thank all the children, teachers, and preschool directors who participated in this study. Special thanks are due to Jaesik Kim and Heesook Kim. In addition, the author wishes to thank Catherine Snow, John Willett, Andrew Nevins, and anonymous reviewers for their feedback on earlier version of the article.

References

  1. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aidinis, A., & Nunes, T. (2001). The role of different levels of PA in the development of reading and spelling in Greek. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 145–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azen, R., & Budescu, D. V. (2003). The dominance analysis for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Methods, 8, 129–148. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.8.2.129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blatchford, P., & Plewis, L. (1990). Pre-school reading-related skills and later reading achievement: Further evidence. British Educational Research Journal, 16, 425–428. doi: 10.1080/0141192900160409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowey, J. A. (1994). Phonological sensitivity in novice readers and nonreaders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 58, 134–159. doi: 10.1006/jecp.1994.1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowey, J., & Francis, J. (1991). Phonological analysis as a function of age and exposure to reading instruction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 91–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1985). Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bryant, P. E., Maclean, M., Bradley, L. L., & Crossland, J. (1990). Rhyme and alliteration, phoneme detection, and learning to read. Developmental Psychology, 26, 429–438. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.26.3.429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Budescu, D. V. (1993). Dominance analysis: A new approach to the problem of relative importance of predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 542–551. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burgess, S. R., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Bidirectional relations of phonological sensitivity and prereading abilities: Evidence from a preschool sample. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 117–141. doi: 10.1006/jecp.1998.2450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1990). Acquiring the alphabetic principle: A case for teaching recognition of phoneme identity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 805–812. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1993). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 104–111. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.85.1.104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaney, C. (1994). Language development, metalinguistic awareness, and emergent literacy skills of 3-year-old children in relation to social class. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cho, J.-R., & McBride-Chang, C. (2005). Correlates of Korean Hangul Acquisition among kindergartners and second graders. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 3–16. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0901_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Jong, P. F., & van der Leij, A. (1999). Specific contributions of phonological abilities to early reading acquisition: Results from a Dutch latent variable longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 450–476. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dixon, M., Stuart, M., & Masterson, J. (2002). The relationship between phonological awareness and the development of orthographic representations. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 295–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ehri, L. C. (1983). A critique of five studies related to letter-name knowledge and learning to read. In L. Gentile, M. Kamil, & J. Blanchard (Eds.), Reading research revisited (pp. 143–153). Columbus, OH: C.E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  18. Evans, M. A., Shaw, D., & Bell, M. (2000). Home literacy activities and their influence on early literacy skills. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 65–75. doi: 10.1037/h0087330.Google Scholar
  19. Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 18, 129–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goswami, U. (1991). Learning about spelling sequences: The role of onsets and rimes in analogies in reading. Child Development, 62, 1110–1123. doi: 10.2307/1131156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goswami, U., & Mead, F. (1992). Onset and rime awareness and analogies in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 153–162. doi: 10.2307/747684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goswami, U., Ziegler, J. C., & Richardson, U. (2005). The effects of spelling consistency on phonological awareness: A comparison of English and German. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 345–365.Google Scholar
  23. Hatcher, P. J., & Hulme, C. (1999). Phonemes, rhymes and intelligence as predictors of children’s responsiveness to remedial reading instruction: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 130–153. doi: 10.1006/jecp. 1998.2480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoien, T., Lundberg, I., Stanovich, K., & Bjaalid, I.-K. (1995). Components of phonological awareness. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 171–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hulme, C., Hatcher, P. J., Nation, K., Brown, A., Adams, J., & Stuart, G. (2002). Phoneme awareness is a better predictor of early reading skill than onset-rime awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 2–28. doi: 10.1006/jecp.2002.2670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnston, R. S., Anderson, M., & Holligan, C. (1996). Knowledge of the alphabet and explicit awareness of phonemes in pre-readers: The nature of the relationship. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Katzir, T., Kim, Y.-S., Wolf, M., O’Brien, B., Kennedy, B., Lovett, M., et al. (2006). Reading fluency: The whole is more than the parts. Annals of Dyslexia, 56, 51–82. doi: 10.1007/s11881-006-0003-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kim, Y.-S. (2007). Phonological awareness and literacy skills in Korean: an examination of the unique role of body-coda units. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 69–94. doi: 10.1017/S014271640707004X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kim, Y.-S. (in press). Cat in a hat or cat in a cap? An investigation of developmental trajectories of phonological awareness for Korean children. Journal of Research in Reading.Google Scholar
  30. Levin, I., Patel, S., Margalit, T., & Barad, N. (2002). Letter names: Effect on letter saying, spelling, and word recognition in Hebrew. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 269–300. doi: 10.1017/S0142716402002060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Levin, I., Shatil-Carmon, S., & Asif-Rave, O. (2006). Learning of letter names and sounds and their contribution to word recognition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 93, 139–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp. 2005.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596–613. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.36.5.596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. MacLean, M., Bryant, P., & Bradley, L. (1987). Rhymes, nursery rhymes, and reading in early childhood. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 255–281.Google Scholar
  34. McBride-Chang, C. (1999). The ABCs of the ABCs: The development of letter-name and letter-sound knowledge. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 45, 285–308. 3–19. Google Scholar
  35. Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M., & Taylor, S. (1998). Segmentation, not rhyming, predicts early progress in learning to read. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71, 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Muter, V., Hulme, C., Snowling, M., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundations of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology. 40, 665–681.Google Scholar
  37. Nation, K., & Hulme, C. (1997). Phonemic segmentation, not onset-rime segmentation, predicts early reading and spelling skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 154–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Na̎slund J. C., & Schneider, W. (1996). Kindergarten letter knowledge, phonological skills, and memory processes: Relative effects on early literacy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62, 30–59.Google Scholar
  39. Oney, B., & Durgunoglu, A. Y. (1997). Beginning to read in Turkish: A phonologically transparent orthography. Applied Psycholinguistics, 18, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scarborough, H. S. (1998). Early identification of children at risk for reading disabilities: Phonological awareness and some other promising predictors. In B. K. Shapiro, P. J. Accardo, & A. J. Capute (Eds.), Specific reading disability: A view of the spectrum (pp. 75–119). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
  41. Schatschneider, C., Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Carlson, C. D., & Foorman, B. R. (2004). Kindergarten prediction of reading skills: A longitudinal comparative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schatschneider, C., Francis, D. J., Foorman, B. R., Fletcher, J. M., & Mehta, P. (1999). The dimensionality of phonological awareness: An application of item response theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 439–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Share, D. L. (2004). Knowing letter names and learning letter sounds: A causal connection. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 213–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Share, D. L., & Blum, P. (2005). Syllable splitting in literate and preliterate Hebrew speakers: Onsets and rimes or bodies or codas? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 182–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Share, D. L., Jorm, A. F., Maclean, R., & Matthews, R. (1984). Sources of individual differences in reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1309–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  47. Sprugevica, I., & Hoien, T. (2003). Enabling skills in early reading acquisition: A study of children in Latvian kindergartens. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stuart, M., & Coltheart, M. (1988). Does reading develop in a sequence of stages? Cognition, 30, 139–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Taylor, I. (1980). The Korean writing system: An alphabet? a syllabary? a logography? In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, & H. Bouma (Eds.), Processing of visible language (pp. 67–82). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  50. Treiman, R. (1983). The structure of spoken syllables: Evidence from novel word games. Cognition, 15, 49–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Treiman, R. (1985). Onsets and rimes as units of spoken syllables: Evidence from children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 161–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Treiman, R. (1992). The role of intrasyllabic units in leaning to read and spell. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 65–106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  53. Treiman, R., & Kessler, B. (2003). The role of letter names in the acquisition of literacy. In R. Kail (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 31). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  54. Treiman, R., Tincoff, R., Rodriguez, K., Mouzaki, A., & Francis, D. J. (1998). The foundations of literacy: Learning the sounds of letters. Child Development, 69, 1524–1540.Google Scholar
  55. Treiman, R., & Zukowski, A. (1991). Level of phonological awareness. In S. A. Brady & D. P. Shankweiler (Eds.), Phonological processes in literacy (pp. 67–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  56. Vellutino, F. R., & Scanlon, D. M. (1987). Phonological coding, phonological awareness, and reading ability: Evidence from a longitudinal and experimental study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 321–363.Google Scholar
  57. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  59. Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848–872.Google Scholar
  60. Yoon, Y.-B., & Derwing, B. (2001). A language without a rhyme: Syllable structure experiments in Korean. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 46, 187–237.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Florida Center for Reading ResearchFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeFLUSA

Personalised recommendations