Abstract

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.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.