Understanding oral spelling: a review and synthesis.
This article reviews a number of studies that report discrepancies between written and oral spelling that cannot easily be explained in terms of deficits to modality-specific output routines. For instance, some patients appear to be 'surface dysgraphic' for oral spelling but 'phonological dysgraphic...
| Publicado en: | Neurocase (Taylor & Francis Ltd) Vol. 9; no. 1; pp. 1 - 15 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | review tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Feb2003
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106880525&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106880525 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 13554794 1II8 jtl: Neurocase (Taylor & Francis Ltd) issn: 13554794 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Feb2003 vid: 9 iid: 1 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 106880525 2003139781 10.1076/neur.9.1.1.14373 NLM16210221 106880525 ppf: 1 ppct: 14 formats: tig: atl: Understanding oral spelling: a review and synthesis. aug: au: Ward J affil: Department of Psychology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK; jamie.ward@ucl.ac.uk sug: subj: Language Disorders Speech Production Measurement Spelling Case Studies Writing ab: This article reviews a number of studies that report discrepancies between written and oral spelling that cannot easily be explained in terms of deficits to modality-specific output routines. For instance, some patients appear to be 'surface dysgraphic' for oral spelling but 'phonological dysgraphic' for written spelling (e.g. Lesser, 1990). A model is proposed to account for these findings which contains the basic premise that the mappings between phonemes and letter names (in oral spelling) is generally non-arbitrary, whereas the mappings between phonemes and letter shapes (in written spelling) is entirely arbitrary. For example, the phoneme /t/ sounds similar to the oral letter name 'Tee' but is arbitrarily related to the written letter 'T' or 't'. An important consequence of this is that oral spelling, in normal spellers, may be more biased by phonological correspondences than written spelling. Other discrepancies between written and oral spelling are reviewed and accommodated within this model, and the model is extended to include recognition of oral spellings and transcoding between spoken and written letter forms. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: review tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|