Advertisement

Akshara Processing in Telugu Depends on Syllabic and Phonemic Sensitivity: Preliminary Evidence from Normal Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Children

  • Vasanta DuggiralaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Literacy Studies book series (LITS, volume 17)

Abstract

The long-held view that most Brahmi-derived Indic scripts are prototypically alpha-syllabaries as well as a more recent proposal that these scripts are functionally alphabetic in terms of how they are read, have met with challenges in recent years. A consensus seems to be emerging about the idea that cognitive processes involved in beginning reading cannot be adequately understood without reference to sub-lexical processing that draws on language-specific syllable structures, and the extent of phonological information coded in the script. The research reported in this chapter deals with Telugu akshara processing abilities of 15 normal-hearing, and 15 hearing-impaired children. They were assessed using three specially designed tasks: akshara substitution, akshara deletion, and adding length marker to the vowel within one of the aksharas of target words. All three tasks made use of meaningful printed Telugu words. Both groups found deletion task more difficult than substitution task. All the children exhibited considerable phonemic sensitivity in the task requiring them to attach a vowel length marker to vowel in the first akshara of each target word. However, they scored poorly in making lexical decisions. These results are discussed in the light of sonority principles, and characteristic features of graphic syllables associated with Telugu writing system. Implications for the assessment and literacy instruction are discussed briefly.

Keywords

Akshara Alphasyllabary Brahmi-derived scripts Sonority Telugu 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to all the children who provided the data discussed in this chapter and to their parents and teachers for extending cooperation during data-collection and training phase. This research was supported by a grant from the University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi under their Research Award scheme.

References

  1. Alvarez, C. J., Garcia-Saavedra, G., Luque, J., & Taft, M. (2016). Syllabic parsing in children: A developmental study using visual word spotting in Spanish. Journal of Child Language, 44.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000916000040. Downloaded on 23rd Feb. 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clements, G. N. (1990). The role of sonority cycle in core syllabification. In J. Kingston & M. E. Beckman (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology (pp. 283–333). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clements, G. N., & Keyser, J. (1983). CV phonology: A generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press.Google Scholar
  4. DALI. (2015). Dyslexia assessment for languages of India. Manesar, India: N.B.R.C.Google Scholar
  5. Daniels, P. T. (2008). Writing systems of major and minor languages. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru, & S. N. Sridhar (Eds.), Language in South Asia (pp. 285–308). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duggirala, V. (2012). Linguistic awareness and hearing impairment in Telugu children: Perspectives on assessment and training. Saarbrücken, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Ettlinger, M., Finn, A. S., & Hudson Kam, C. L. (2012). Effect of sonority on word segmentation: Evidence for the use of a phonological universal. Cognitive Science, 36(4), 655–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghatage, A. M. (Ed.). (1964). Phonemic and morphemic frequencies in Hindi. Pune, India: Deccan College.Google Scholar
  9. Harris, M., & Moreno, C. (2004). Deaf children’s use of phonological coding: Evidence from reading, spelling and working memory. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9(3), 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hill, E. C. (1991). A primer of Telugu characters. New Delhi, India: Manohar Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Joanisse, M. F. (1999). Exploring syllable structure in connectionist networks. Paper presented at the 14th international congress of phonetic sciences, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Kaefer, T. (2016). Integrating orthographic and phonological knowledge in early readers: Implicit and explicit knowledge. Child Development Research, 2016, 1. Retrieved from:  https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6036/29.
  13. Krishnamurti, B., & Gwynn, J. P. L. (1985). A grammar of modern Telugu. New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, D. G. (1994). Ancient scripts and phonological knowledge. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nag, S. (2007). Early reading in Kannada: The pace of acquisition of orthographic knowledge and phonemic awareness. Journal of Research in Reading, 30(1), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nag, S., Treiman, R., & Snowling, M. J. (2010). Learning to spell in an alphasyllabary: The case of Kannada. Writing Systems Research, 2(1), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nakamura, P. R., Joshi, R. M., & Ryan Ji, X. (P.C.). Investigating the asymmetrical roles of syllabic and phonemic awareness role in akshara processing. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  18. Olson, A. C. (2004). Orthographic structure and deaf spelling errors: Syllables, letter frequency, and speech. The Quart. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57(3), 385–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Padden, C. (1993). Lessons to be learned from young deaf orthographer. Linguistics and Education, 5, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pandey, P. (2007). Phonology-orthography interface in Devanagari for Hindi. Written Language and Literacy, 10(2), 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parker, S. G. (2012). Sonority distance and sonority dispersion- a typological survey. In S. G. Parker (Ed.), The sonority controversy (pp. 101–165). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Patel, P. G. (2007). Akshara as a linguistic unit in Brahmi scripts. In P. G. Patel, P. Pandey, & D. Rajgor (Eds.), The Indic scripts: Paleographic and linguistic perspectives (pp. 167–213). New Delhi, India: DK Print World.Google Scholar
  23. Purushothama, G. (1994). A framework for testing Kannada reading. Mysore, India: CIIL.Google Scholar
  24. Ramachandra, V., & Karanth, P. (2007). The role of literacy in the conceptualization of words: Data from Kannada speaking children and non-literate adults. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20, 173–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ramaswami, N. (1999). Common linguistic features in Indian languages: Phonetics. Mysore, India, CIIL.Google Scholar
  26. Rao, U. M. (Ed.) (2006). An analysis of the Telugu corpus: Some preliminary findings. Unit-VII. Corpus linguistics: PG Diploma in Computer Applications in Indian Languages (PGDCAIL) 421 (pp. 125–161). Hyderabad, India: University of Hyderabad.Google Scholar
  27. Reddy, P. P., & Koda, K. (2013). Orthographic constraints on phonological awareness in biliteracy development. Writing Systems Research, 5(1), 110–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rimzhim, A., Katz, L., & Fowler, C. (2014). Brahmi derived orthographies are typologically Aksharik but functionally predominantly alphabetic. Writing Systems Research, 6(1), 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sailaja, P. (1999). Syllable structure of Telugu. Paper presented at the International Conference of Phonetic Sciences 14 (ICPhS) held at San Francisco, CA. Retrieved from: https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/icphs-proceedings/ICPhS1999/papers/p14_0743.pdf
  30. Salomon, R. (2000). Typological observations on the Indic script group and its relationship to other alphasyllabaries. Studies in Linguistic Sciences, 30(1), 87–03.Google Scholar
  31. Sastry, J. V. (1972). Telugu phonetic reader. Mysore, India: CIIL.Google Scholar
  32. Share, L. D. (2014). Alphabetism in reading science. Frontiers in Psychology.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00752.
  33. Share, L. D., & Daniels, P. T. (2016). Aksharas, alphasyllabaries, abugidas, alphabets, and orthographic depth: Reflections on Rimzhim, Katz, and Fowler (2914). Writing Systems Research, 8(1), 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vasanta, D. (2004). Processing phonological information in a semi-syllabic script: Developmental data from Telugu. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17, 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Vasanta, D. (2007). Phonological awareness and literacy acquisition in Telugu speaking normal- hearing and hearing-impaired children. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 4(2), 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vasanta, D. (2014). Phonological knowledge: Theoretical and clinical considerations In D. Vasanta (Ed.), Clinical applications of phonetics and phonology. Monograph of the Indian speech and hearing association 14:1 (pp. 1–47).Google Scholar
  37. Vasanta, D., & Sailaja, P. (1998). Word awareness and word formation: A study of compound noun production and segmentation by Telugu children. In B. Vijayanarayana & C. Ramarao (Eds.), Word formation in Indian languages (pp. 35–51). Hyderabad, India: Book Links Corporation.Google Scholar
  38. Vasanta, D., & Sailaja, P. (1999). Making sense of compound nouns: A study of word relatedness in Telugu. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(4), 331–346.Google Scholar
  39. Vennemann, T. (1988). Preference laws for syllable structure and the explanation of sound change. Berlin, Germany: Mouton.Google Scholar
  40. Yavas, M. S., & Core, C. W. (2001). Phonemic awareness of coda consonants and sonority in bilingual children. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 15(1–2), 35–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yavas, M. S., & Goldstein, B. (2006). Aspects of bilingual phonology: The case of Spanish-English bilingual children. In Z. Hua & B. Dodd (Eds.), Phonological development and disorders in children: A multilingual perspective (pp. 265–285). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsOsmania UniversityHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations