Advertisement

Linking Morphological Knowledge to English Decoding Ability: Large Effects of Little Suffixes

Part of the Neuropsychology and Cognition book series (NPCO, volume 22)

Abstract

It has long been known that an awareness of how letters correspond to speech sounds (or phones) is crucial for a child to learn to read English (Adams, 1990; Bradley & Bryant, 1985; Liberman, 1982; Mann, 1998; Perfetti, 1985). This allows young decoders of the English orthography to gain the insight that strings of letters, like b-i-g and d-o-g, can be sounded out and synthesized into words. A simplistic or ‘shallow’ phonemic decoding strategy, which ascribes one phoneme to each grapheme, is beneficial when the words to be decoded are orthographically regular and phonologically simple. However, by the fifth grade, more than 27 less common and more complex words (such as methodical and angelic) will be encountered each day (Anglin, 1993; Tyler & Nagy, 1989), and a more complicated decoding strategy must be used.

Keywords

Phonological Awareness Morphological Awareness Phoneme Awareness Complex Word Derivational Morphology 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58, 1–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berko, J. (1958). The child’s learning of English morphology. Word, 14, 150–177.Google Scholar
  4. Bradley, L. & Bryant, P. (1985). Rhyme and reasons in reading and spelling. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brady, S. A., & Shankweiler, D. P. (Eds.). (1991). Phonological processes in literacy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Brittain, M. M. (1970). Inflectional performance and early reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 6, 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, B. (1996) The leamability of the alphabetic principle: Children’s initial hypotheses about how print represents spoken language. Applied Psycholingistics, 9, 247–266.Google Scholar
  9. Carlisle, J. F. (1988). Knowledge of derivational morphology and spelling ability in fourth, sixth and eighth graders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 9, 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlisle, J. F. (1995). Morphological awareness and early reading achievement. In L. Feldman’s (Ed.) Morphological aspects of language processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ, p. 189–209.Google Scholar
  11. Carlisle, J. F. (In press). Awareness of morphological structure and meaning: Impact on reading. Reading & Writing.Google Scholar
  12. Carlisle, J. F., & Nomanbhoy, D. M. (1993). Phonological and morphological awareness in first graders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). Word frequency book. New York: American Heritage.Google Scholar
  14. Chomsky, N. (1964) Comments for Project Literacy Meeting, Project Literacy report no. 2, Reprinted in M. Lester (Ed.) Readings in applied transformational grammar (pp. 1–8). New York: Holt Reinhard and Winston.Google Scholar
  15. Derwing, B. L., & Baker, W. J. (1979). Recent research on the acquisition of English morphology. In P. Fletcher & M. Garman (Eds.), Language acquisition: Studies in first language development (pp. 209–222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  17. Fowler, A., & Liberman, I. (1995). The role of phonology and orthography in morphological awareness. In L. Feldman’s (Ed.) Morphological aspects of language processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ, p. 157–188.Google Scholar
  18. Gottardo, A., Stanovich, K., & Siegel, L. (1996). The relationships between phonological sensitivity, syntactic processing, and verbal working memory in the reading performance of third-grade children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63, 563–582.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leong, C. K. (1989). Productive knowledge of derivational rules in poor readers. Annals of Dyslexia, 39, 94–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liberman, I. Y. (1982). A language-oriented view of reading and its disabilities. In H. Mykelbust (Ed.), Progress in learning disabilities, 5. New York: Grune and Stratton.Google Scholar
  21. Liberman, I. Y., Liberman, A. M., Mattingly, I. G., & Shankweiler, D. (1980). Orthography and the beginning reader. In J. Kavanagh and R. Venezky (Eds.), Orthography, reading and dyslexia. Baltimore: University Park Press, 137–154.Google Scholar
  22. Mahony, D. L. (1994). Using sensitivity to word structure to explain variance in high school and college level reading ability. Reading and Writing, 6, 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mahony, D. L., Singson, M. F., & Mann, V. (In press). Reading ability and sensitivity to morphological relations. Reading & Writing.Google Scholar
  24. Mann, V. (1998). Language problems: A key to early reading problems. In: Learning about learning disabilities (2nd Ed) (B. Wong, Ed.) Academic Press. Pp 163–199.Google Scholar
  25. Myerson, R. (1976). A study of children’s knowledge of certain word formation rules and the relationship of this knowledge to various forms of reading achievement (Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University). University Micro-films International, 76–130, 205.Google Scholar
  26. Nagy, W., Diakidoy, I., & Anderson, R. C. (1993). The acquisition of morphology: Learning the contribution of suffixes to the meanings of derivatives. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 15–170.Google Scholar
  27. Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading skill. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Rosner, J., & Simon, D. P. (1971). The auditory analysis test: An initial report. Journal of Learning Disability, 4, 384–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Seidenberg, M. S. (1985). The time course of phonological activation in two writing systems. Cognition, 19,1–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shankweiler, D., Crain, S., Katz, L., Fowler, A. E., Liberman, A. E., Brady, S. A., Thornton, R., Lundquist, E., Dreyer, L., Fletcher, J. M., Stuebing, K. K., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (1995). Cognitive profiles of reading-disabled children: Comparisons of language skills in phonology, morphology and syntax. Psychological Science, 6, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Singson, M., Mahony, D., & Mann, V. (In press). The relation between reading ability and morphological skills: Evidence from derivational suffixes. Reading & Writing. Google Scholar
  32. Treiman, R., Mullennix, J., Bijeljac-Babic, R., & Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1995). The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124 (2), 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1989). The acquisition of English derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vogel, S. A. (1977). Morphological ability in normal and dyslexic children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10,649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weschler, D. (1967). Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence. Cleveland, Ohio: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  36. Wiig, E. H., Semel, E. M., & Crouse, M. A. (1973). The use of English morphology by high-risk and learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 6, 457–465.Google Scholar
  37. Woodcock, R. W. (1973). Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  38. Yuill, N., Oakhill, J., & Parkin, A. J. (1989). Working memory, comprehension ability and the resolution of text anomaly. British Journal of Psychology, 80(3), 351–361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Cognitive Sciences, School of Social ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations