A comparative quantitative analysis of Greek orthographic transparency

Orthographic transparency refers to the systematicity in the mapping between orthographic letter sequences and phonological phoneme sequences in both directions, for reading and spelling. Measures of transparency previously used in the analysis of orthographies of other languages include regularity, consistency, and entropy. However, previous reports have typically been hampered by severe restrictions, such as using only monosyllables or only word-initial phonemes. Greek is sufficiently transparent to allow complete sequential alignment between graphemes and phonemes, therefore permitting full analyses at both letter and grapheme levels, using every word in its entirety. Here, we report multiple alternative measures of transparency, using both type and token counts, and compare these with estimates for other languages. We discuss the problems stemming from restricted analysis sets and the implications for psycholinguistic experimentation and computational modeling of reading and spelling.

[1]  Aimilios Chalamandaris,et al.  Rule-based grapheme-to-phoneme method for the Greek , 2005, INTERSPEECH.

[2]  C. D. Porpodas,et al.  Phonological and lexical encoding processes in beginning readers: Effects of age and word characteristics , 1990 .

[3]  C. D. Porpodas,et al.  Literacy Acquisition in Greek: Research Review of the Role of Phonological and Cognitive Factors , 2005 .

[4]  Conrad Perry,et al.  Speed of lexical and nonlexical processing in French: The case of the regularity effect , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[5]  Cristina Burani,et al.  Orthographic complexity and word naming in Italian: Some words are more transparent than others , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[6]  R. Peereman,et al.  Consistency and word-frequency effects on spelling among first-to fifth-grade French children : A regression-based study , 2008 .

[7]  Kenneth A. Spencer,et al.  Feedforward, -backward, and neutral transparency measures for British English , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[8]  Marco Zorzi,et al.  Do current connectionist learning models account for reading development in different languages? , 2004, Cognition.

[9]  P. H. Seymour,et al.  Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[10]  C. D. Porpodas,et al.  Patterns of Phonological and Memory Processing in Beginning Readers and Spellers of Greek , 1999, Journal of learning disabilities.

[11]  D. Jared.  Spelling-Sound Consistency and Regularity Effects in Word Naming , 2002 .

[12]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Simulating consistency effects and individual differences in nonword naming: A comparison of current models , 2006 .

[13]  Paul R. Hanna,et al.  Phoneme-grapheme correspondences as cues to spelling improvement , 1966 .

[14]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Feedback-consistency effects in single-word reading: Brett Kessler, Rebecca Treiman, and John , 2007 .

[15]  David A. Balota,et al.  Visual Word Recognition: The Journey from Features to Meaning (A Travel Update) , 2006 .

[16]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[17]  M Coltheart,et al.  DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. , 2001, Psychological review.

[18]  S. Pinker,et al.  On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition , 1988, Cognition.

[19]  Arthur M. Jacobs,et al.  Statistical analysis of the bidirectional inconsistency of spelling and sound in French , 1996 .

[20]  M. Coltheart.  Lexical access in simple reading tasks , 1978 .

[21]  Conrad Perry,et al.  The DRC model of visual word recognition and reading aloud: An extension to German , 2000 .

[22]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[23]  Arthur M. Jacobs,et al.  What is the pronunciation for -ough and the spelling for /u/? A database for computing feedforward and feedback consistency in English , 1997 .

[24]  Frauke M. Hellwig,et al.  Onset Entropy Matters – Letter-to-phoneme Mappings in Seven Languages , 2005 .

[25]  K. Spencer.  Predicting children's word-spelling difficulty for common English words from measures of orthographic transparency, phonemic and graphemic length and word frequency. , 2007, British journal of psychology.

[26]  Anne Cutler,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[27]  Paul W. B. Atkins,et al.  Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. , 1993 .

[28]  R. Baayen,et al.  Do type and token effects reflect different mechanisms? Connectionist modeling of Dutch past-tense formation and final devoicing , 2004, Brain and Language.

[29]  Gary F. Marcus,et al.  German Inflection: The Exception That Proves the Rule , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  Conrad Perry,et al.  How predictable is spelling? Developing and testing metrics of phoneme-grapheme contingency , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[31]  G. Underwood.  Strategies of information processing , 1980 .

[32]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  Prediction and Entropy of Printed English , 1951 .

[33]  George Carayannis,et al.  Design and Implementation of the Online ILSP Greek Corpus , 2000, LREC.

[34]  Sound-Spelling Consistency in Adults' Orthographic Learning. , 2008 .

[35]  Manuel Carreiras,et al.  Contrasting effects of token and type syllable frequency in lexical decision , 2008 .

[36]  Prisca Stenneken,et al.  Sublexical frequency measures for orthographic and phonological units in German , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[37]  J. Ziegler,et al.  Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory. , 2005, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  Linnea C. Ehri,et al.  Learning to Read Words: Theory, Findings, and Issues , 2005 .

[39]  M. Zorzi,et al.  Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model. , 1998 .

[40]  Chris Davis,et al.  The role of feedback from phonology to orthography in orthographic learning : an extension of item-based accounts , 2008 .

[41]  Susanne Borgwaldt,et al.  Word-initial entropy in five languages: Letter to sound, and sound to letter , 2004 .

[42]  Usha Goswami,et al.  Children’s orthographic representations in English and Greek , 1997 .

[43]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Relationships between sounds and letters in English monosyllables , 2001 .