Prelexical phonologic computation in a deep orthography: Evidence from backward masking in Hebrew

Abstract

Prelexical phonological computation of print was examined in Hebrew orthography using backward masking, Target words were masked by homophonic, phonologically similar, or phonologically dissimilar nonwords. Phonological similarity between masks and targets affected detection in a nonlinear fashion: No differences were found between homophonic and phonologically similar masks, whereas phonologically dissimilar masks hindered identification dramatically. This suggests that representations computed in brief exposures are coarse grained and not detailed enough to capture fine phonetic differences.Theories of word recognition differ in the role they assign to phonological processing in the course of perceiving printed stimuli. Whereas some theorists suggest that phonological recoding is a late component ofprint processing, occurring mainly for low

Reading aloud is not automatic: Processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print.

“…This claim is made by Perfetti and colleagues (e.g., Perfetti, Bell, & Delaney, 1988;Xu & Perfetti, 1999;Zhang, Perfetti, & Yang, 1999), Frost and colleagues (e.g., Gronau & Frost, 1997;Frost, 1998;2003), Grainger and colleagues (e.g., Ferrand & Grainger, 1992;Grainger, Diependaele, Spinelli, Ferrand, & Farioli, 2003), and Van Orden and colleagues (e.g., Van Orden, Pennington, & Stone, 1990;Ziegler, Van Orden, & Jacobs, 1997), among others (Brysbaert, 2001;Catena, Fuentes, & Tudela, 2002;Johnston & Castles, 2003;Lukatela Recoding & Turvey, 1994;Luo, Johnson, & Gallo, 1998). For example, Xu and Perfetti (1999) argue for "rapid automatic phonological activation, independent of stimulus based processing strategies" (p. 26).…”

“…For example, Xu and Perfetti (1999) argue for "rapid automatic phonological activation, independent of stimulus based processing strategies" (p. 26). Gronau and Frost (1997) claim their data are evidence for…”

“…In Dual Route models, lexical representations can be activated either directly from an orthographic code, or indirectly after a phonological code is assembled by the sublexical route (e.g., Coltheart et al, 2001). Another possibility is that phonology is computed before lexical activation (e.g., Frost, 1998;Gronau & Frost, 1997;Frost & Yogev, 2001;Lukatela & Turvey, 1990;1994a, 1994bPerfetti, Bell, &Delaney, 1988).…”

Prelexical phonological coding of visual words in Dutch: Automatic after all

“…They indeed found such a pseudohomophone effect. Gronau and Frost (1997) reported a similar effect in Hebrew, but only when the phonological changes introduced by the graphemic control mask were large (i.e., the target word kapit was not recognized more often when it was followed by a homophonicmask than when it was followed by the graphemic control mask kapiz, but there was a difference with the graphemic control mask pronounced as kapezet). Gronau and Frost suggested that this was also true for Perfetti et al's stimuli (i.e., the phonemic difference between BLOO and BLOS is not limited to the vowel; there is an additional consonant in the graphemic control).…”

Orthographic and phonological computation in visual word recognition: Evidence from backward masking in Hebrew

“…In a recent study, Gronau and Frost (1997) employed backward masking to map the early computationof printed information in Hebrew. Gronau and Frost masked their target words not only by homophonic masks, but also by phonologically similar or dissimilar masks.…”