Children with developmental dyslexia do evince, in reading, a number of different types of behavior: a) they often read words and sentences without understanding them; b) they have particular difficulty in reading words devoid of sense; c) they frequently make up endings for the words they are reading; d) they are unable to pin down the error in a mistaken word. If considered together, all these types of behavior correspond to two fundamental strategies: 1) at times the dyslexic child ascribes meanings to words or segments of words that have meaning; 2) at times the dyslexic child is unable to ascribe a meaning, or the correct meaning, to words or segments of words, that have meaning. These two strategies may be considered as two antithetical answers to the same problem: a) how to connect written words to their meanings, departing from their auditory representation (phonological access) and/or their visual representation (visual access); b) how to coordinate processes of conversion from graphemes to phonemes (in either case without semantic meaning) with the aim of reading, giving a semantic meaning to what is read. Over the last ten years, the question of the relationships between written language and oral language has been considered from a number of very different standpoints, and theories on the pathogenesis of developmental dyslexia have been greatly influenced by the way this problem has been formulated (Benton, 1975; Rutter and Yule, 1975; Rourke, 1976; Mattis, 1978; Vellutino, 1979a; Jorm, 1979a; Shallice and Warrington, 1980). A) There was some question as to whether or not dyslexic children encounter a specific difficulty in the conversion from phonemes to graphemes. Departing from this formulation it was thought: either that the dyslexic child has prejudicial difficulties in recognizing, categorizing, and combining the graphemes in sequences (visuo-perceptual hypothesis) (Kerschner, 1975; Clifton-Everest, 1976; Fletcher and Satz, 1979; Lovegrove et al., 1980), or that the dyslexic child will encounter prejudicial difficulties in composing or breaking up words into phonemes (linguistic hypothesis) (Liberman et al., 1977; Fischer et al., 1978; Levi and Musatti, 1978; Vellutino, 1979). B) There was some question as to whether dyslexic children find it difficult to globalize written words and work them into a structure of meanings (Denkla and Rudel, 1976 a-b; Coltheart, 1978; Saffran, 1980). Departing from this formulation, it was thought: either that the dyslexic child doesn't know how to connect the written word to its auditory representation (hypothesis of phonological access) (Patterson, 1978; Jorm, 1979b), or that the dyslexic child doesn't know how to connect the written word directly to the corresponding concept (hypothesis of direct visual access) (Ellis, 1979; Holmes, 1978). As we have already indicated, in order to read it is necessary to find one sole answer to two types of problems: a) to tie the written word to a linguistic meaning; b) to coordinate processes of conversion from graphemes to phonemes, with the aim of reading with meaning. Theories on the pathogenesis of developmental dyslexia are distinguished in accordance with how these two individual questions are considered, and how the relationships between the two types of problems is explained. 1) For some authors reading is first and foremost a process of visual transcription of oral language (Bouma and Legein, 1980; Carr Payne et al., 1980); once a biunivocal correspondence between graphemes and phonemes is established, and that the graphemes can be globalized into words, according to these authors, the problem of ascribing a meaning to the written word is for the most part posed if not solved. 2) For some authors reading is as much a process of cognitive-semantic construction as oral language is (Gibson and Levin, 1975; Ferreiro, 1976; Lentin, 1978). Those who read foresee individual graphemes and syllables on a basis of precise semantic hypotheses; in these authors view, the conversion from graphemes into phonemes is only one particular example of phonological categorizing. The outline we have just examined describes only the broad contours of a complex debate on this topic. What most concerns us is the pinning down of the linguistic-cognitive paradox of reading (Levi et al., 1979; Levi et al., 1981): a) in order to master reading it is necessary to know how to convert graphemes into phonemes (individually and in sequence) even in the absolute sense, that is to say irrespective of the quest for, or the hooking up with a semantic meaning; which explains the complexity that marks the reading of words without meaning, or with a meaning that is unknown; b) in order to master reading it is necessary to advance semantic hypotheses with regard to what is read, and to check the congruence between the assumed word and the real word: which explains the complexity that marks the task of singling out individual errors in wrong words.
Read full abstract