Cover not available
Part of
Writing Systems, Reading Processes, and Cross-Linguistic Influences: Reflections from the Chinese, Japanese and Korean Languages
Edited by Hye K. Pae
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 7] 2018
► pp. 447–458

Chapter 22
Looking ahead

Theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical implications

This closing chapter briefly summarizes research findings on the processes of word reading in three East-Asian orthographies (Chinese, Japanese, and Korean) and calls for theoretical and practical attention related to word reading among speakers of these unique languages. Based on the analyses of and reflections on studies of the three orthographies, we first summarize what we know about word reading with respect to reading universals, reading particulars, and cross-language transfer. We then articulate theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical considerations to advance to the next phase of reading sciences in these three orthographies.
Keywords: three East-Asian scripts, theoretical advance, methodological advance
Article outline
  • What we know: Reading universals, particulars, and cross-linguistic influences
    • Dominant research trend: Anglocentricity
    • Reading universals
    • Reading particulars
    • Cross-linguistic influences
  • What’s ahead: Theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical considerations
    • Theory building
    • Methodological advances
    • Pedagogical implications
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 July 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.7.22bac
References (21)
References
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Apel, K. (2010). What is orthographic knowledge? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 42, 592–603. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Apel, K., Wolter, J. A., & Masterson, J. J. (2006). Effects of phonotatic and orthotactic probabilities during fast mapping on 5-year olds’ learning to spell. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 21–42. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Borgwaldt, S. R., Hellwig, F. M., & de Groot, A. M. B. (2005). Onset entropy matters – Letter-to-phoneme mappings in seven languages. Reading and Writing, 18, 211–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, J-R., Chiu, M. M., & McBride-Chang, C. (2011). Morphological awareness, phonological awareness, and literacy development in Korean and English: A 2-year longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 383–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, J-R. & Ji, Y-K. (2011). Cognitive profiles of Korean poor readers. Dyslexia, 17, 312–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, J-R., McBride-Chang, C., & Park, S-G. (2008). Phonological awareness and morphological awareness: Differential association to regular and irregular word recognition in early Korean Hangul readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 255–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second Language Research, 7, 103–117.Google Scholar
(2003). Effects of the second language on the first. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Coltheart, M. (2005). Modeling reading: The dual-route approach. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 6–23). Oxford, England: Blackwell.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehri, L. C. (2014). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 5–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalindi, S. C., McBride, C., Tong, X., Wong, N. L. Y., Chung, K. H. K., & Lee, C-Y. (2015). Beyond phonological and morphological processing: Pure copying as a marker of dyslexia in Chinese but not poor reading of English. Annals of Dyslexia, 65, 53–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koda, K. (2008). Impacts of prior literacy experience on second language learning to read. In K. Koda & A. Zehler (Eds.), Learning to read across languages (pp. 68–97). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Liu, D., Chen, X., & Chung, K. H. (2015). Performance in a visual search task uniquely predicts reading abilities in third-grade Hong Kong Chinese children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 307–324. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Pae, H. K. (2018). The Korean language, writing system Hangul, and word reading. In H. K. Pae (Ed.), Writing systems, reading processes, and cross-linguistic influences: Reflections from the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean languages. (pp. 1–21) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. (2003). The universal grammar of reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 3–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523–568.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Share, D. L. (2008). On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: The perils of overreliance on an “outlier” orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 584–615. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, M., Cheng, C., & Chen, S-W. (2006). Contribution of morphological awareness to Chinese-English biliteracy acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 542–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, M., Ko, I. Y., & Choi, J. (2009). The importance of morphological awareness in Korean-English biliteracy acquisition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 132–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar