scholarly journals Toward a parallel and cascading model of the writing system: A review of research on writing processes coordination

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Olive
Keyword(s):  
Writing System ◽  
Writing Processes ◽  
System A

Introduction

2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Keyword(s):  
Social Practice ◽  
Limited Range ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The Self ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Source Information ◽  
System A ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Adequate Understanding

Technology and energy sources monitoring: control, efficiency, and optimization - belong to theory and practice of monitoring. Continuous supervising, diagnosing, managing, controlling, compensating, documenting; a process of acquiring and transferring streams of information (usually source information) about the analysed object, process, and relations between the same and the environment that can be used to realize the postulated state depending on needs and knowledge available – it is sciences and practice of monitoring. The self sciences of monitoring is a specific type of social practice aimed at adequate understanding of the reality in order to control and use it with a limited range of consequences and responsibilities. In the most general terms, the purpose of each filed of science (art) is to transform the reality into an image (virtualization). Music was the oldest language; painting was the oldest writing system. A language is a constant work of mind. It is not a creation (ergon), but rather an action (energeia – activity). Nobody thinks, as regards a given word, exactly the same as another person. Understanding is at the same time misunderstanding. A theory cannot be produced out of the results of observations, it must be invented. A theory does not have to be true, but it should encourage thinking.

Writing systems and language contact in the Euro- and Sinocentric worlds

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Coulmas
Keyword(s):  
Language Contact ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Writing Systems ◽  
System A ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Status ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractOn the social level languages contact usually implies hierarchies, reflecting historical processes of adaptation and power relations between groups of speakers. This paper considers language contact in the written mode from the point of view of choice, that is, choice of language and choice of writing system. A wider range of factors that have a bearing on choice in contact situations of languages and their writing systems must be taken into consideration: political, social, linguistic and ideological. Examples of each kind from the Eurocentric and Sinocentric worlds are discussed and compared with each other. Particular attention is paid to the relationship bilingual writers create between the units of two languages and two writing systems which, from a sociolinguistic point of view, is seen as indicative of the status and function of the languages involved.

scholarly journals Intransigent Vowel-Consonant Position in Korean Dysgraphia: Evidence of Spatial-Constructive Representation

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
HyangHee Kim ◽  
Duk L. Na ◽  
Eun Sook Park
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Testing ◽  
Brain Lesion ◽  
English Teacher ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Cerebral Lateralization ◽  
Writing Processes ◽  
Focal Brain Lesion ◽  
Orthographic Representations ◽  
English Alphabet ◽  
Multi Level

Dysgraphia due to a focal brain lesion can be characterized by substitution, transposition, deletion and/or addition errors of graphemes or strokes. However, those linguistic errors can be language-specific because the writing system of a given language may influence error patterns. We investigated a Korean stroke patient, a 57-year-old English teacher with dysgraphia both in Korean Han-geul (한글) and in English alphabet writings. The results of an experimental testing revealed transposition errors between a consonant and a vowel only in English but not in Korean writings. This austerity of vowel-consonant position may be attributed to a unique Korean writing system of a spatially well-formed syllabic configuration or block with consonant(s) and a vowel. In light of a neuropsychological model of writing, which depicts a multi-level spelling and writing process, we suggest a spatial-constructional component of internal orthographic representations in Korean writing. This Korean graphemic configuration feature may be resistant to a focal, left cerebral damage, and thus, we also discuss our results in terms of cerebral lateralization of the writing processes.

Der Vistembor brehlte dem Luhr Knotten auf den bänken Leuster – Wie sich die Fähigkeit zur satzinternen Großschreibung entwickelt

2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (spec) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Günther
Keyword(s):  
Historical Development ◽  
Proper Names ◽  
Writing System ◽  
System A ◽  
The Way

AbstractUsing capital letters within sentences not only for proper names but also for nouns is a specific feature of the German writing system. A short sketch of the historical development and two different approaches to the description of this phenomenon is given. Data using the dictation of pseudoword texts show that the ability to master this feature of German orthography develops independently of the way the rule of capitalizing nouns is taught at school.

Book Review: K. Rajan, Early Writing System: A Journey from Graffiti to Brahmi

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-139
Author(s):  
Dilip K. Chakrabarti
Keyword(s):  
Early Writing ◽  
Writing System ◽  
System A

"Diepe" Spelling en Het Leesproces, Speculaties en Data

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 51-64
Author(s):  
Vincent J. van Heuven
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word Recognition ◽  
Visual Word ◽  
Reading Process ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Spelling Errors ◽  
System A ◽  
Series Of Experiments ◽  
Widespread View ◽  
Frequency Counts

Dutch orthography has traditionally been described as a morphophonemic writing system, a set of morpheme preserving regularities superimposed on a predominantly phonemic substratum. Causes for complicating a strictly regular one-to-one phoneme-letter relationship in Dutch are isolated, and discussed in terms of the diffic-ulties they pose to children learning to write. Recent and older frequency counts of spelling errors substantiate the widespread view that deviations from a 1 - 1 phoneme-letter correspondence are highly conducive to error. However, on the basis of (psycho)linguistic considerations, morpheme preserving regularities have been claimed to exert facilitating effects in the reading process. A series of experiments is proposed to determine to what extent morpho-logically motivated deviations from a 1 - 1 phoneme-letter correspondence, as well as more arbitrary disturbances of these correspondences, contribute to visual word recognition and reading. Some recent results of analogous experiments on foreign orthographies are mentioned, and discussed with respect to their implications for Dutch orthography.

scholarly journals Linguistic Awareness, English Orthography and Reading Instruction

1978 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Downing
Keyword(s):  
Reading Instruction ◽  
System Of Systems ◽  
Language Teachers ◽  
Writing System ◽  
English Orthography ◽  
Linguistic Awareness ◽  
System A ◽  
English Spelling

One common characteristic of reading instruction is the teacher's attempt to describe the “phonic” rules of the writing system. But modern linguists question whether English spelling is related simply to what phonic teachers call “sounds.” The classical linguistic view of English orthography was that it is a graphemic code for the abstract units of speech technically termed “phonemes” but that this code is marred by numerous irregularities of grapheme-phoneme relations. In recent years this has been challenged in two revolutionary proposals. Though their theories are different, both Chomsky and Venezky deny that English orthography is a phonemic system. A third possibility is that neither the classical nor the revolutionary view of English orthography is correct. Albrow, Lefevre, and Vachek have each independently proposed that English orthography is a system of systems. One system is phonemic but, in addition, there are others representing non-phonemic aspects of language. Teachers of reading who believe that their pupils need to understand the underlying system of English orthography must consider these alternative explanations if they are to choose which one should be the basis of their instruction. This article reviews the evidence for these alternative descriptions and discusses their feasibility as a basis for teaching young beginners.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document