Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-4gwwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-24T21:16:19.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reading strategies of bilingual normally progressing and dyslexic readers in Hindi and English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2007

ASHUM GUPTA  and
GULGOONA JAMAL
ASHUM GUPTA
Affiliation:
University of Delhi
GULGOONA JAMAL
Affiliation:
University of Delhi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the reading accuracy of dyslexic readers in comparison to chronological age-matched normally progressing readers in Hindi and English using word reading tasks, matched for spoken frequency of usage, age of acquisition, imageability, and word length. Both groups showed significantly greater reading accuracy in Hindi than in English. For normally progressing readers, spoken frequency of usage had no significant effect in Hindi and a significant effect in English, whereas for dyslexic readers it had a significant effect in both languages. In Hindi, normally progressing readers produced only nonword errors; dyslexic readers produced a far greater percentage of nonword than word errors. In English, normally progressing readers produced greater percentage of word than nonword errors, whereas dyslexic readers produced greater percentage of nonword than word errors. Results are discussed in terms of orthographic transparency, sublexical, and lexical reading strategies.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 2007 , pp. 47 - 68
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

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

References

Bright W. 1996. The Devanagari script. In P. Daniels & W. Bright (Eds.), The world's writing systems (pp. 384– 390). New York: Oxford University Press.
Carroll J. B., & White M. N. 1973. Word frequency and age-of-acquisition as determiners of picture-naming latency. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 85– 95.Google Scholar
Coltheart M. 1978. Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of information processing. New York: Academic Press.
Coltheart M. 1980. Reading, phonological recoding and deep dyslexia. In M. Coltheart, K. E. Patterson, & J. C. Marshall (Eds.), Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Cossu G. 1999. The acquisition of Italian orthography. In M. Harris & G. Hatano (Eds.), Learning to read and write: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 10– 33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
D'Anguilli A., Siegel L., & Serra E. 2001. The development of reading in English and Italian in bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 479– 507.Google Scholar
Defior S., Martos F., & Cary L. 2002. Differences in reading acquisition development in two shallow orthographies: Portuguese and Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 135– 148.Google Scholar
Ehri L. C. 1997. Learning to read and learning to spell are one and the same, almost. In C. A. Perfetti, L. Rieben, & M. Fayol (Eds.), Learning to spell: Research, theory, and practice across languages (pp. 237– 270). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ellis A. 1984. Reading, writing and dyslexia: A cognitive analysis. London: Erlbaum.
Ellis N. C., & Hooper A. M. 2001. Why learning to read is easier in Welsh than in English: Orthographic transparency effects evinced with frequency-matched tests. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 571– 599.Google Scholar
Frith U., Wimmer H., & Landerl K. 1998. Differences in phonological recoding in German- and English-speaking children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 31– 54.Google Scholar
Gilhooly K. J., & Logie R. H. 1980. Methods and designs: Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity, and ambiguity ratings for 1,944 words. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 12, 395– 427.Google Scholar
Goswami U., Gombert J. E., & De Barrera L. F. 1998. Children's orthographic representations and linguistic transparency: Nonsense word reading in English, French, and Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 19– 52.Google Scholar
Gupta A. 1997. Reading test in Hindi. Unpublished manuscript. University of Delhi, India, Department of Psychology.
Gupta A. 2003. Reading difficulties of Hindi-speaking children with developmental dyslexia. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17, 79– 99.Google Scholar
Gupta A., & Jamal G. 2004. Reading and spelling among bilingual dyslexic and skilled readers. Journal of Personality and Clinical Studies, 20, 15– 33.Google Scholar
Joubert S. A., & Lecours A. R. 2000. The role of sublexical graphemic processing in reading. Brain and Language, 72, 1– 13.Google Scholar
Kostic D., Mitter A., & Rastogi K. G. 1975. A short outline of Hindi phonetics. Calcutta: Indian Statistical Institute, India.
Lukatela K., Carello C., Shankweiler D., & Liberman I. 1995. Phonological awareness in illiterates. Applied Psycholinguistics, 16, 463– 487.Google Scholar
Monaghan J., & Ellis A. W. 2002. What exactly interacts with spelling-sound consistency in word naming? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 183– 206.Google Scholar
Morrison C. M., Chappell T. D., & Ellis A. W. 1997. Age of acquisition norms for a large set of object names and their relation to adult estimates and other variables. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 504, 528– 559.Google Scholar
Morton J., & Patterson K. E. 1980. A new attempt at an interpretation, or, an attempt at a new interpretation. In M. Coltheart, K. E. Patterson, & J. G. Marshall (Eds.), Deep dyslexia. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Porpodas C. 1991. The relation between phonemic awareness and reading and spelling of Greek words in the first school years. In M. Carretero, M. L. Pope, P. R. Simons, & J. I. Pozo (Eds.), Leaning and instruction: European research in an international context (Vol. III, pp. 203– 217). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Raven J. C., Court J. H., & Raven J. 1992. Coloured progressive matrices. Oxford: Oxford Psychological Press.
Seymour P. H. K., Aro M., & Erskine J. M. 2003. Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143– 174.Google Scholar
Seymour P. H. K., & Elder E. 1986. Beginning reading without phonology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 3, 1– 36.Google Scholar
Spencer L. H., & Hanley J. R. 2003. Effects of orthographic transparency on reading and phoneme awareness in children learning to read in Wales. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 1– 28.Google Scholar
Stuart M., & Coltheart M. 1988. Does reading develop in a sequence of stages? Cognition, 30, 139– 181.Google Scholar
Vaid J., & Gupta A. 2002. Exploring word recognition in a semi-alphabetic script: The case of Devanagari. Brain and Language, 81, 679– 690.Google Scholar
Venezky R. L. 1970. The structure of English orthography. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
Wimmer H. 1996. The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: Evidence from children learning to read German. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61, 80– 90.Google Scholar
Wimmer H., & Goswami U. 1994. The influence of orthographic consistency on reading development: Word recognition in English and German children. Cognition, 51, 91– 103.Google Scholar
Wimmer H., & Hummer P. 1990. How German speaking first graders read and spell: Doubts on the importance of the logographic stage. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11, 349– 368.Google Scholar
Ziegler J. C., & Goswami U. 2005. Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psychological grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 3– 29.Google Scholar