[NIFL-LD:3723] Re: reading IS comprehension

From: John Nissen (jn@tommy.demon.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 05 2001 - 08:53:40 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fA5Dre007021; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:53:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:53:40 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <98156@tommy.demon.co.uk>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: jn@tommy.demon.co.uk (John Nissen)
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-LD:3723] Re: reading IS comprehension
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Mailer: PCElm 1.11
Status: O
Content-Length: 1885
Lines: 47

Clif,

The psylinguistic research suggests that whole word recognition and
phonemic recognition occur simultaneously, i.e. in parallel rather
than serially.   Of course we cannot be conscious of this while we
are reading - since our consciousness is essentially serial.
The recognition which is quickest "wins" in that it passes on a
signal to the semantic processing in the brain first.

The whole word recognition and phonemic recognition may be
preceded by some kind of single character recognition, but I've not
seen any research on this, except that when there are errors
deliberately introduced they can affect the word recognition speed and
phonemic recognition speed to different extents sometimes stopping one.  
So "fowneemique" would halt the word recognition altogether, whereas
"pbonemic" might slow the word recognition so little that it wins
before the phonemic recognition has a chance to object!

Cheers,

John
--
In message <5.1.0.14.2.20011105012658.02d6ad90@mail> nifl-ld@nifl.gov writes:
>--=====================_5250775==_.ALT
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>Lucille,
>
>What the discussion has been dealing with has been the definition of
>"reading".
>
>Maybe the "reading process" from seeing the word to comprehending the 
>meaning of the word/words. Accurate perception of the printed word must 
>come first. You have to know it is a word first and not a picture. Thought 
>"sight word" readers might feel that it is a simultaneous process, it is 
>not. It is a linear process initially and then fast but not simultanious.
>
>Clif

-- 
Access the word, access the world! -- Try our WordAloud software!!

John Nissen, Cloudworld Ltd., Chiswick, London, UK
Tel:   +44 (0) 845 458 3944 (local rate in the UK)
Fax:   +44 (0) 20 8742 8715
Email: jn@cloudworld.co.uk
Web:   http://www.cloudworld.co.uk and http://www.wordaloud.co.uk



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:04 EST