Loading…
Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation
Words that sound similar tend to have similar meanings, at a distributed, sub-symbolic level (Monaghan, Shillcock, Christiansen, & Kirby, 2014). We extend this paradigm for measuring systematicity to letters and their canonical pronunciations. We confirm that orthographies that were consciously...
Saved in:
Published in: | Cognition 2022-09, Vol.226, p.105197-105197, Article 105197 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173 |
container_end_page | 105197 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 105197 |
container_title | Cognition |
container_volume | 226 |
creator | Jee, Hana Tamariz, Monica Shillcock, Richard |
description | Words that sound similar tend to have similar meanings, at a distributed, sub-symbolic level (Monaghan, Shillcock, Christiansen, & Kirby, 2014). We extend this paradigm for measuring systematicity to letters and their canonical pronunciations. We confirm that orthographies that were consciously constructed to be systematic (Korean and two shorthand writing systems) yield significant correlations between visual distances between characters and the corresponding phonological distances between canonical pronunciations. We then extend the approach to Arabic, Hebrew, and English and show that letters that look similar tend to sound similar in their canonical pronunciations. We indicate some of the implications for education, and for understanding typical and atypical reading. By using different visual distance metrics we distinguish between symbol-based (Korean, shorthand) and effort-based (Arabic, Hebrew, English) grapho-phonemic systematicity. We reinterpret existing demonstrations of phono-semantic systematicity in terms of cognitive effort. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105197 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2675600727</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0010027722001858</els_id><sourcerecordid>2726977176</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFu1DAQhi0EokvLK4AlLlyytZ3EznKrKlqQKvVAe7YmziTrVdZebKerfTzeDGe37YELJ8ujb74ZzU_IZ86WnHF5uVkaPzibrHdLwYTI1Zqv1Buy4I0qC9WUzVuyYIyzggmlzsiHGDeMsUqo5j05K2vZrDK4IH9-HWLCLSRrbDpQ6-gIbphgQAquo2mNtIeYjp84-j01AWEeS31P9yFv4AYaj474jT66DkNMGZ7Lae9pOuwwzqzzroDQ2hQgHGjA8WiJtMW0R8y6kNZ-CLBbW0PNGgKYlF0vW9hADWSHNTDSXfBucsYeFRfkXQ9jxI_P7zl5vPn-cP2juLu__Xl9dVeYqmpSsWpbASjBAIpKll1dGQYsH6pjspS95LIEaKVQIJCB7Aw0DHjdqrIDo7gqz8nXkzdP_z1hTHpro8Ex3wv9FLWQqpaMKTGjX_5BN34KLm-nhRJypbJPZkqdKBN8jAF7vQt2m6-jOdNzynqjX1PWc8r6lHLu_PTsn9otdq99L7Fm4OoEYD7Ik8Wgo7HoDHY2oEm68_a_Q_4C1jDDMw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2726977176</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Jee, Hana ; Tamariz, Monica ; Shillcock, Richard</creator><creatorcontrib>Jee, Hana ; Tamariz, Monica ; Shillcock, Richard</creatorcontrib><description>Words that sound similar tend to have similar meanings, at a distributed, sub-symbolic level (Monaghan, Shillcock, Christiansen, & Kirby, 2014). We extend this paradigm for measuring systematicity to letters and their canonical pronunciations. We confirm that orthographies that were consciously constructed to be systematic (Korean and two shorthand writing systems) yield significant correlations between visual distances between characters and the corresponding phonological distances between canonical pronunciations. We then extend the approach to Arabic, Hebrew, and English and show that letters that look similar tend to sound similar in their canonical pronunciations. We indicate some of the implications for education, and for understanding typical and atypical reading. By using different visual distance metrics we distinguish between symbol-based (Korean, shorthand) and effort-based (Arabic, Hebrew, English) grapho-phonemic systematicity. We reinterpret existing demonstrations of phono-semantic systematicity in terms of cognitive effort.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-0277</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7838</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105197</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35689873</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Characters ; Cognitive ability ; Orthography ; Phonics ; Pronunciation ; Systematicity ; Writing systems</subject><ispartof>Cognition, 2022-09, Vol.226, p.105197-105197, Article 105197</ispartof><rights>2022</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Sep 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33223</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35689873$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jee, Hana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tamariz, Monica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shillcock, Richard</creatorcontrib><title>Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation</title><title>Cognition</title><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><description>Words that sound similar tend to have similar meanings, at a distributed, sub-symbolic level (Monaghan, Shillcock, Christiansen, & Kirby, 2014). We extend this paradigm for measuring systematicity to letters and their canonical pronunciations. We confirm that orthographies that were consciously constructed to be systematic (Korean and two shorthand writing systems) yield significant correlations between visual distances between characters and the corresponding phonological distances between canonical pronunciations. We then extend the approach to Arabic, Hebrew, and English and show that letters that look similar tend to sound similar in their canonical pronunciations. We indicate some of the implications for education, and for understanding typical and atypical reading. By using different visual distance metrics we distinguish between symbol-based (Korean, shorthand) and effort-based (Arabic, Hebrew, English) grapho-phonemic systematicity. We reinterpret existing demonstrations of phono-semantic systematicity in terms of cognitive effort.</description><subject>Characters</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Orthography</subject><subject>Phonics</subject><subject>Pronunciation</subject><subject>Systematicity</subject><subject>Writing systems</subject><issn>0010-0277</issn><issn>1873-7838</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkcFu1DAQhi0EokvLK4AlLlyytZ3EznKrKlqQKvVAe7YmziTrVdZebKerfTzeDGe37YELJ8ujb74ZzU_IZ86WnHF5uVkaPzibrHdLwYTI1Zqv1Buy4I0qC9WUzVuyYIyzggmlzsiHGDeMsUqo5j05K2vZrDK4IH9-HWLCLSRrbDpQ6-gIbphgQAquo2mNtIeYjp84-j01AWEeS31P9yFv4AYaj474jT66DkNMGZ7Lae9pOuwwzqzzroDQ2hQgHGjA8WiJtMW0R8y6kNZ-CLBbW0PNGgKYlF0vW9hADWSHNTDSXfBucsYeFRfkXQ9jxI_P7zl5vPn-cP2juLu__Xl9dVeYqmpSsWpbASjBAIpKll1dGQYsH6pjspS95LIEaKVQIJCB7Aw0DHjdqrIDo7gqz8nXkzdP_z1hTHpro8Ex3wv9FLWQqpaMKTGjX_5BN34KLm-nhRJypbJPZkqdKBN8jAF7vQt2m6-jOdNzynqjX1PWc8r6lHLu_PTsn9otdq99L7Fm4OoEYD7Ik8Wgo7HoDHY2oEm68_a_Q_4C1jDDMw</recordid><startdate>20220901</startdate><enddate>20220901</enddate><creator>Jee, Hana</creator><creator>Tamariz, Monica</creator><creator>Shillcock, Richard</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220901</creationdate><title>Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation</title><author>Jee, Hana ; Tamariz, Monica ; Shillcock, Richard</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Characters</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Orthography</topic><topic>Phonics</topic><topic>Pronunciation</topic><topic>Systematicity</topic><topic>Writing systems</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jee, Hana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tamariz, Monica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shillcock, Richard</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jee, Hana</au><au>Tamariz, Monica</au><au>Shillcock, Richard</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation</atitle><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><date>2022-09-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>226</volume><spage>105197</spage><epage>105197</epage><pages>105197-105197</pages><artnum>105197</artnum><issn>0010-0277</issn><eissn>1873-7838</eissn><abstract>Words that sound similar tend to have similar meanings, at a distributed, sub-symbolic level (Monaghan, Shillcock, Christiansen, & Kirby, 2014). We extend this paradigm for measuring systematicity to letters and their canonical pronunciations. We confirm that orthographies that were consciously constructed to be systematic (Korean and two shorthand writing systems) yield significant correlations between visual distances between characters and the corresponding phonological distances between canonical pronunciations. We then extend the approach to Arabic, Hebrew, and English and show that letters that look similar tend to sound similar in their canonical pronunciations. We indicate some of the implications for education, and for understanding typical and atypical reading. By using different visual distance metrics we distinguish between symbol-based (Korean, shorthand) and effort-based (Arabic, Hebrew, English) grapho-phonemic systematicity. We reinterpret existing demonstrations of phono-semantic systematicity in terms of cognitive effort.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>35689873</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105197</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0010-0277 |
ispartof | Cognition, 2022-09, Vol.226, p.105197-105197, Article 105197 |
issn | 0010-0277 1873-7838 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2675600727 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Elsevier |
subjects | Characters Cognitive ability Orthography Phonics Pronunciation Systematicity Writing systems |
title | Systematicity in language and the fast and slow creation of writing systems: Understanding two types of non-arbitrary relations between orthographic characters and their canonical pronunciation |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T15%3A18%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Systematicity%20in%20language%20and%20the%20fast%20and%20slow%20creation%20of%20writing%20systems:%20Understanding%20two%20types%20of%20non-arbitrary%20relations%20between%20orthographic%20characters%20and%20their%20canonical%20pronunciation&rft.jtitle=Cognition&rft.au=Jee,%20Hana&rft.date=2022-09-01&rft.volume=226&rft.spage=105197&rft.epage=105197&rft.pages=105197-105197&rft.artnum=105197&rft.issn=0010-0277&rft.eissn=1873-7838&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105197&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2726977176%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-9bb2ae6acae2463d54c0a0783d0636f6163aab627a2e0a6dca80a15b73dac7173%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2726977176&rft_id=info:pmid/35689873&rfr_iscdi=true |