Error patterns in word reading and spelling in Persian: Is spelling more difficult than reading?
The objective of the present study is to examine the error patterns for Persian reading and spelling when controlling for the complexity level of words. A sample of 140 children attending Grades 1–4 in Iran read and spelled the same words that differed in reading transparency (transparent vs. opaque) and spelling consistency (monographic vs. polygraphic). Children’s reading and spelling errors were analyzed for four types of words including transparent-monographic, transparent-polygraphic, opaque-monographic, and opaque-polygraphic. Children, across all grades, read transparent-monographic words as accurately as they spelled the same words, however, the opaque-polygraphic words, the hardest categories of words, were read more accurately than they were spelled. Moreover, children read transparent-polygraphic words more accurately than they spelled these words. The opposite pattern was observed for opaque-monographic words, that is, these words were spelled more accurately than they were read. Further examination of errors revealed that the words that children most often read correctly but spelled incorrectly were polygraphic, and the words that children most often spelled correctly but read incorrectly were opaque. Further, fine-grained analyses of reading and spelling errors revealed that the degree of the complexity level of words also increased error rates for both polygraphic and opaque words. These results suggest that differences in word characteristics and the complexity level of the words explain the discrepancy in difficulty level between reading and spelling.
KeywordsReading Spelling Persian orthography Consistency effect School age
- Aro, M. (2006). Learning to read: The effect of orthography. In R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 531–550). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bruck, M., Genesee, F., & Caravolas, M. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early literacy acquisition. In B. A. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp. 145–162). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bryant, P. E., & Bradley, L. (1980). Why children sometimes write words which they do not read. In U. Frith (Eds), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 355–370). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Frith, U. (1980). Unexpected spelling problems. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 495–515). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. East Sussex: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Jared, D. (1997). Spelling-sound consistency affects the naming of high-frequency words. Journal of Memory and Language, 4, 723–750.Google Scholar
- Kessler, B., Treiman, R., & Mullennix, J. (2008). Feedback-consistency effects in single word reading. In E. L. Grigorenko & A. J. Naples (Eds.), New directions in communication disorders research: Integrative approaches. Single-word reading: Behavioral and biological perspectives (pp. 159–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Porpodas, C. (2001). Cognitive processes in first grade reading and spelling of Greek. The Journal of the Hellenic Psychology Society, 8, 384–400.Google Scholar