Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lexical and nonlexical processes in the skilled reading and spelling of Persian

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to examine the contribution of lexical and nonlexical processes to skilled reading and spelling in Persian. Persian is a mixed orthography that allows one to study within one language characteristics typically found in shallow orthographies as well as those found in deeper orthographies. 61 senior high-school students (mean age = 17; 8, SD = 4 months) attending schools in Iran were tested on reading and spelling of words and nonwords. The word stimuli differed in terms of reading transparency (transparent when all phonemes have corresponding letters vs. opaque when short vowels were not marked with a letter) and spelling polygraphy (nonpolygraphic phonemes vs. polygraphic phonemes). The nonwords were transparent and nonpolygraphic. The reading results showed that both transparent and opaque words were read faster than nonwords, and that transparent words were read faster than opaque words. Moreover, both transparent and opaque words were affected by word frequency. These findings suggest that skilled readers of Persian relied on lexical processes to read words. In contrast, the spelling results failed to show a word-advantage effect suggesting that skilled spellers of Persian rely on nonlexical processes to spell words. Moreover, orthographic complexity also affected spelling. Specifically, nonpolygraphic words were spelled faster than polygraphic words for both transparent and opaque words. Taken together, the findings showed that skilled reading and spelling in Persian rely on different underlying processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baluch, B. (1993). Lexical decision in Persian: A test of the orthographic depth hypothesis. International Journal of Psychology, 28, 19–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baluch, B., & Besner, D. (1991). Visual word recognition: Evidence for strategic control of lexical and nonlexical routines in oral reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(4), 644–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baluch, B., & Besner, D. (2001). Basic process in reading: Semantics affects speeded naming of high-frequency words in an alphabetic script. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(1), 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barron, R. W. (1980). Visual and phonological strategies in reading, spelling. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 195–214). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C. (1992). Interaction between lexical and assembled spelling (in English, Italian, Welsh). In C. M. Sterling & C. Robson (Eds.), Psychology, spelling and education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C., & Bastiani, P. (1997). Lexical priming of nonword spelling in the regular orthography of Italian. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 499–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C., & Seymour, P. H. K. (1988). Lexical priming and sound-to-spelling contingency effects in nonword spelling. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A, 5–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basso, A., & Paulin, M. (2003). Semantic errors in naming, repetition, spelling and drawing from memory: A new Italian case. Neurocase, 9, 109–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonin, P., Collay, S., Fayol, M., & Meot, A. (2005). Attentional strategic control over nonlexical and lexical processing in written spelling to dictation in adults. Memory and Cognition, 33, 59–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. D. A., & Ellis, N. C. (1994). Issues in spelling research: An overview. In G. D. A. Brown & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of spelling: Theory, process and intervention (pp. 3–25). Chichester, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehri, L. C. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relation to recoding. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp.107–143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and performance, 13, 104–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, J. R., & Kay, J. (1992). Does letter-by-letter reading involve the spelling system? Neuropsychologia, 30, 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, V. M., & Babauta, M. L. (2005). Single or dual representation for reading and spelling? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 18, 257–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, V. M., & Carruthers, J. (1998). The relation between reading and spelling in skilled adults readers. Journal of memory and language, 39, 264–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iribarren, I. C., Jarema, G., & Lecours, A. R. (1999). Lexical reading in Spanish: Two cases of phonological dyslexia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 407–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jared, D. (2002). Spelling sound consistency and regularity effects in word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 723–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaminska, Z. (2003). Little frog and toad: Interaction of orthography and phonology in Polish spelling. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, L., & Feldman, L. B. (1983). Relation between pronunciation and recognition of printed words in deep and shallow orthographies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 9, 157–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, J., & Hanley, J. R. (1991). Simultaneous form perception and serial letter recognition in a case of letter-by-letter reading. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 249–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinoshita, S., Lupker, S. J., & Rastle, K., (2004). Modulation of regularity and lexicality effects in reading aloud. Memory and Cognition, 32, 1255–1264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreiner, D. S. (1992). Reaction time measures of spelling: Testing a two-strategy model of skilled spelling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 18, 765–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiner, D. S., & Gough, P. B. (1990). Two ideas about spelling: Rules and word-specific memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwong, T. E., & Varnhagen, C. K. (2005). Strategy development and learning to spell new words: Generalization of a process. Developmental Psychology, 41, 148–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassaji, H., & Geva, E. (1999). The contribution of phonological and orthographic processing skills to adult ESL reading: Evidence from native speakers of Farsi. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20, 241–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson K., & Coltheart, V. (1987). Phonological processes in reading: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance: The psychology of reading (pp. 422–447). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perin, D. (1983). Phonemic segmentation and spelling. British Journal of Psychology, 74, 129–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, C., & Ziegler, J. C. (2004). Beyond the Two-strategy model of skilled spelling: Effects of consistency, grain size, and orthographic redundancy. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 325–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Coltheart, M. (2002a). A dissociation between orthographic awareness and spelling production. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 43–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Coltheart, M. (2002b). How predictable is spelling? Developing and testing metrics of phoneme-grapheme contingency. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 897–915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahbari, N. (2007). Reading and spelling development in Persian: Do children show the same accuracy level for reading and spelling. Unpublished dissertation.

  • Rahbari, N., Sénéchal, M., & Arab-Moggahdam, N. (2007). The role of orthographic and phonological processing skills in reading and spelling of monolingual Persian children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20, 511–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raman, I. (2003). Lexicality effects in single-word naming in alphabetic Turkish orthography. In M. Joshi, C. K. Leong, & B. L. Kaczmarek (Eds.), Literacy acqusition: Role of phonology, morphology and orthography (pp. 83–93). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raman, I., & Baluch, B. (2001). Semantic effects as function of reading skills in word naming of a transparent orthography. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raman, I., Baluch, B., & Besner, D. (2004). On the control of visual word recognition: Changing routes versus changing deadlines. Memory and Cognition, 32, 489–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raman, I., & Weekes, B. (2005). Acquired dyslexia in a Turkish-English speaker. Annals of Dyslexia, 55, 79–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, B., Epstein, C., & Tainturier, M. J. (2002). The integration of information across lexical and nonlexical processes in spelling. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 19, 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M. S., Waters, G. S., Barnes, M. A., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 29, 294–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnik, B., & Fidell, L. (2000). Using multivariate statistics. New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, S. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2003). The impact of reader skill on phonological processing in visual word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven, L., Baayen, H., & Scheruder, R. (2004). Orthographic constraints and frequency effects in complex word identification. Written Language and Literacy, 7, 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weekes, B., & Coltheart, M. (1996). Surface dyslexia and surface dysgraphia: Treatment studies and their theoretical implications. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 13, 277–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, H., & Mayringer, H. (2002). Dysfluent reading in the absence of spelling difficulties: A specific disability in regular orthographies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 272–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, J. C., Ferrand, L., & Montant, M. (2004). Visual phonology: The effects of orthographic consistency on different auditory word recognition tasks. Memory and Cognition, 32, 732–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, J. C., Jacobs, A. M., & Stone, G. O. (1996). Statistical analysis of the bidirectional inconsistency of spelling and sound in French. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 504–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, J. C., Perry, C., & Coltheart, M. (2003). Speed of Lexical and nonlexical processing in French: The case of the regularity effect. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 947–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, J. C., Stone, G. O., & Jacobs, A. M. (1997). What’s the pronunciation for OUGH and the spelling for/u/? A database for computing feedforward and feedback inconsistency in English. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29, 600–661.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada, K1S5B6

    Noriyeh Rahbari & Monique Sénéchal

Authors
  1. Noriyeh Rahbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monique Sénéchal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noriyeh Rahbari.

 

 

Appendix A List of real words (60) used to test Persian adults’ reading and spelling with frequencies in parentheses
Full size table
Appendix B List of nonwords (40) used to test nonlexical processing
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rahbari, N., Sénéchal, M. Lexical and nonlexical processes in the skilled reading and spelling of Persian. Read Writ 22, 511–530 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9122-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9122-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation