The effect of orthographic systems on the developing reading system: Typological and computational analyses.

Abstract

Orthographic systems vary dramatically in the extent to which they encode a language's phonological and lexico-semantic structure. Studies of the effects of orthographic transparency suggest that such variation is likely to have major implications for how the reading system operates. However, such studies have been unable to examine in isolation the contributory effect of transparency on reading due to co-varying linguistic or socio-cultural factors. We first investigated the phonological properties of languages using the range of the world's orthographic systems (alphabetic; alphasyllabic; consonantal; syllabic; logographic), and found that, once geographical proximity is taken into account, phonological properties do not relate to orthographic system. We then explored the processing implications of orthographic variation by training a connectionist implementation of the triangle model of reading on the range of orthographic systems whilst controlling for phonological and semantic structure. We show that the triangle model is effective as a universal model of reading, able to replicate key behavioural and neuroscientific results. Importantly, the model also generates new predictions deriving from an explicit description of the effects of orthographic transparency on how reading is realised and defines the consequences of orthographic systems on reading processes.

Culture is not destiny, for reading: highlighting variable routes to literacy within writing systems

“…On the one hand, there is considerable evidence for a universal core reading network 13 that includes the left mid‐fusiform gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus, superior and middle temporal gyrus, and the inferior parietal lobule. Moreover, connectionist models of reading demonstrate the same computational architecture can give rise to the reading behaviors observed across different writing systems 4,14,15 . On the other hand, variation of orthographies along each of the dimensions discussed above (mapping principle, transparency, and perceptual complexity) leads to different behavioral and neural demands on the individuals reading them.…”

“…Moreover, connectionist models of reading demonstrate the same computational architecture can give rise to the reading behaviors observed across different writing systems. 4,14,15 On the other hand, variation of orthographies along each of the dimensions discussed above (mapping principle, transparency, and perceptual complexity) leads to different behavioral and neural demands on the individuals reading them. In other words, different orthographies lend themselves to different reading challenges and strategies for dealing with these challenges, which ultimately lead to differences in the degree of activation of areas of the reading network.…”

Reading skill correlates in frontal cortex during semantic and phonological processing

“…The authors hypothesized a similar shift for reading acquisition in children, which has been validated by a meta-analysis of neuroimaging work (Martin, Schurz, Kronbichler, & Richlan, 2015), with greater activation of phonological representations in childhood during reading tasks. Recent work compares simulations across multiple writing systems and proposes a link between OP pathway activation and skill for all alphabetic languages (Smith, Monaghan, & Huettig, 2021). There is less evidence, however, for the relative contributions of OP versus OS engagement as a reflection of task.…”

“…The study sample was taken from an existing dataset that does not include a sample of poor Booth, 2015). Recent computational models of reading suggest that phonological involvement does not vary much as a function of task, but semantic involvement does (Smith, Monaghan, & Huettig, 2021).…”

Methodological Issues in Literacy Research Across Languages: Evidence From Alphabetic Orthographies

“…English‐based models of reading acquisition typically reflect this need for context‐ or word‐specific information even at the early stages of reading by emphasizing dual routes for word recognition (e.g., Zorzi, 2010) or different divisions of labor between the activation of phonological and semantic codes during word identification (e.g., Seidenberg, 2011; Smith, Monaghan, & Huettig, 2021). This notion of dual routes for words is reflected in the tradition of focusing separately on decoding skills, assessed with pseudoword‐reading tasks, and word recognition skills, assessed with familiar or exception word‐reading tasks.…”