Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T12:17:48.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Linguistic Affiliation Constraint and phoneme recognition in diglossic Arabic*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2010

ELINOR SAIEGH-HADDAD ,
IRIS LEVIN ,
NAREMAN HENDE  and
MARGALIT ZIV
ELINOR SAIEGH-HADDAD*
Affiliation:
Department of English (Linguistics Division), Bar-Ilan University, Israel
IRIS LEVIN
Affiliation:
School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
NAREMAN HENDE
Affiliation:
School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
MARGALIT ZIV
Affiliation:
School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Elinor Saiegh-Haddad, Department of English (Linguistics Division), Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan 52900, Israel. tel: +972 3 531 8239; fax: +972 3 535 4062; e-mail: saieghe@mail.biu.ac.il
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study tested the effect of the phoneme's linguistic affiliation (Standard Arabic versus Spoken Arabic) on phoneme recognition among five-year-old Arabic native speaking kindergarteners (N=60). Using a picture selection task of words beginning with the same phoneme, and through careful manipulation of the phonological properties of target phonemes and distractors, the study showed that children's recognition of Standard phonemes was poorer than that of Spoken phonemes. This finding was interpreted as indicating a deficiency in the phonological representations of Standard words. Next, the study tested two hypotheses regarding the specific consequences of under-specified phonological representations: phonological encoding versus phonological processing. These hypotheses were addressed through an analysis of the relative power of distractors. The findings revealed that children's difficulty in accessing Standard Arabic phonemes was due to a difficulty in the phonological encoding of Standard words. We discuss the implications of the findings for language and literacy development in diglossic Arabic.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , March 2011 , pp. 297 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

[*]

Our thanks are extended to the Price Brodi Initiative for supporting this study and especially to the director, Yehudit Shvili, for facilitating its implementation. We are also grateful to the children, teachers and school principals for participating in this study.

References

REFERENCES

Abu-Rabia, S. (2000). Effects of exposure to literary Arabic on reading comprehension in a diglossic situation. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 13, 147–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ayari, S. (1996). Diglossia and illiteracy in the Arab world. Language, Culture and Curriculum 9, 243–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B. & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1990). Acquiring the alphabetic principle: A case for teaching recognition of phoneme identity. Journal of Educational Psychology 28, 805–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, H. K. & Washington, J. A. (2006). Malik goes to school: Examining the language skills of African American students from preschool-5th grade. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbro, C. (1996). Early linguistic abilities and reading development: A review and a hypothesis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 8, 453–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbro, C. (1998). When reading is ‘readn’ or somthn: Distinctness of phonological representations of lexical items in normal and disabled readers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 39, 149–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feitelson, D., Goldstein, Z., Iraqi, J. & Share, D. L. (1993). Effects of listening to story reading on aspects of literacy acquisition in a diglossic situation. Reading Research Quarterly 28, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word 14, 47–56.Google Scholar
Fowler, A. E. (1991). How early phonological development might set the stage for phoneme awareness. In Brady, S. & Shankweiler, D. (eds), Phonological processes in literacy: A tribute to Isabelle Y. Liberman, 79–117. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gerken, L., Murphy, W. D. & Aslin, R. N. (1995). Three- and four-year olds' perceptual confusions for spoken words. Perception & Psychophysics 57, 475–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goswami, U. (2000). Phonological representations, reading development and dyslexia: Towards a cross-linguistic theoretical framework. Dyslexia 6, 133–51.3.0.CO;2-A>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goswami, U. & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hove: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Holes, C. (2004). Modern Arabic: Structures, functions, and varieties. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, R. B. (1986). Phonological deficiencies in children with reading disability: Evidence from an object naming task. Cognition 22, 225–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maamouri, M. (1998). Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia and its impact on the quality of education in the Arab region. Discussion paper prepared for The World Bank, The Mediterranean Development Forum.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading 11, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Linguistic distance and initial reading acquisition: The case of Arabic diglossia. Applied Psycholinguistics 24, 431–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2004). The impact of phonemic and lexical distance on the phonological analysis of words and pseudowords in a diglossic context. Applied Psycholinguistics 25, 495–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2005). Correlates of reading fluency in Arabic: Diglossic and orthographic factors. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 18, 559–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2007a). Linguistic constraints on children's ability to isolate phonemes in Arabic. Applied Psycholinguistics 28, 605–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2007b). Epilinguistic and metalinguistic phonological awareness may be subject to different constraints: Evidence from Hebrew. First Language 27, 385–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2008). On the challenges that diglossia poses to the acquisition of basic literacy skills in Arabic. Literacy and Language 1, 105–126 (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. (forthcoming). The effect of exposure to Standard Arabic and linguistic distance from Spoken Arabic on lexical processing in Standard Arabic. In Aram, D. & Korat, O. (eds), Literacy development, learning and teaching at home and school. PLACE: Jerusalem: Magnes Press (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. & Geva, E. (2008). Morphological awareness, phonological awareness, and reading in English–Arabic bilingual children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 21, 481–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E. & Ali, Y. (in prep.). A corpus linguistic study of the lexicon of five-year-old Arabic native speaking children.Google Scholar
Saiegh-Haddad, E., Kogan, N. & Walters, J. (in press). Universal and language-specific constraints on phonemic awareness: Evidence from Russian–Hebrew bilingual children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal.Google Scholar
Schreuder, R. & van Bon, W. H. J. (1989). Phonemic analysis: Effects of word properties. Journal of Research in Reading 12, 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, S. A. & Murray, B. A. (1994). Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational Psychology 86, 221–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E.Cunningham, A. E. & Cramer, B. B. (1984). Assessing phonological awareness in kindergarten children: Issues of task comparability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 38, 175–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, D. & Goswami, U. (1997a). Picture naming deficits in developmental dyslexia: The phonological representations hypothesis. Brain and Language 56, 334–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swan, D. & Goswami, U. (1997b). Phonological awareness deficits in developmental dyslexia and the phonological representations hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 66, 18–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, E. & Senechal, M. (2004). Long-term association between articulation quality and phoneme sensitivity: A study from age 3 to age 8. Applied Psycholinguistics 25, 513–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treiman, R. & Weatherson, S. (1992). Effects of linguistic structure on children's ability to isolate initial consonants. Journal of Educational Psychology 84, 174–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walley, A. C., Metsala, J. L. & Garlock, V. M. (2003). Spoken vocabulary growth: Its role in the development of phoneme awareness and early reading ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 16, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yopp, H. K. (1988). The validity and reliability of phonemic awareness tests. Reading Research Quarterly 23, 159–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, J. C. & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin 131, 3–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed