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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cognition 2022-09, Vol.226, p.105197-105197, Article 105197
Main Authors: Jee, Hana, Tamariz, Monica, Shillcock, Richard
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, &amp; 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, &amp; 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, &amp; 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