Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
Some weeks ago I posted a query on whether any work had been done on segmental awareness in Indian languages using Indic scripts (Linguist 14.1024. I received responses from Prakash Padakannaya and Prathibha Karanth, both of whom have done extensive work in this area. (Thanks also to Doug Saddy and Loraine Obler for pointing me or my message to these scholars.) I append some of the references they sent me below. To briefly summarize the results of this research: there is a clear effect of script type on children's ability to handle a variety of tasks that require some degree of segmental awareness. These include such tasks as phoneme reversal (being able to change /puki/ into /piku/) or phoneme deletion (being able to change /panda/ into /pada/). Generally, learners of alphasyllabic Indic scripts are less able to handle these tasks than learners of alphabetic scripts. In one study (Prakash 2000), Prakash compares Kannada-speaking children learning standard Kannada orthography with blind Kannada-speaking children learning an alphabetic braille and shows that the blind children are much better at these kinds of tasks than the sighted children (who only start to catch up in fifth grade when they start learning English). However, contrary some suggestions in the literature that segmental awareness is a product of learning a purely alphabetic script, the situation with Indic scripts seems not to be an all-or-nothing proposition. For example, as Prakash et al. (1993) point out, Hindi learners of Devanagari have an easier time dealing with the /d/ in /do/ as a separate segment than the /n/ in /n&/ (& = schwa); this is because in /Co/ (for some consonant C) the /o/ is written as a separate diacritic, whereas for /X&/ the /&/ is the so-called "inherent vowel" and is not written. There is also interesting cross-scriptal variation, where a symbol with identical functions in two scripts can correspond to different behaviors in learners of those scripts depending upon the graphical form of the symbol. For example the anusvara symbol is used to represent a post-vocalic nasal. In Devanagari it is written as a small dot above the righthand end of the orthographic syllable. In Kannada it is a circle written inline. And literate Kannada speakers are better at treating postvocalic nasals as separate segments than literate Hindi speakers. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Prakash Padakannaya (in Press). Phonemic and Syllabic Awareness in Children Acquiring Literacy in a Semi-Syllabic Script. In P.G.Patel and P. Pandey (Eds.) New Delhi: Sage Publications Prakash, P., D.Rekha., R.Nigam, & P.Karanth; (1993). Phonological Awareness, Orthography and Literacy. In Robert J.Scholes (Ed.), Literacy: Linguistic and Cognitive Perspectives (pp.55-70). Hillslade, NJ: Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Padakannaya Prakash, Rekha D., Jyotsna Vaid, Malatesha Joshi 2002 (December) Simultaneous acquisition of Literacy skills in English and Kannada: A longitudinal study. International Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA), Singapore. Prakash Padakannaya. 2002 (July) Reading and writing in non alphabetic and non ideographic orthography: The case of Kannada. Symposium on "Learning to read and write in nonalphabetic script. International Applied Psychology Conference 2002 (July), SINGAPORE. Prakash Padakannaya. 2002 (March 14-15) Dyslexia, Phonological awareness, and orthography. First Conference on Clinical Linguistics. Central Institute of Indian Languages, Mysore, India. Prakash Padakannaya, Chandana, M.V. and Suma, S. 2001 (May 31-June3) Orthographic awareness, phonemic awareness and developmental dyslexia. 2001 Conference of Society for Scientific Study of Reading (SSSR), Boulder, Colorado, USA. Prakash Padakannaya. 2000 (October 13-14) Is phonemic Awareness an Artefact of Alphabetic Literacy?! Poster presentation, ARMADILLO - 11 (Association for Research in Memory , Attention, Decisoin making, Intelligence, Language, Learning & Organizational perception), Texas A&M University, College Station, USA. Pratibha Karanth. 2002. Reading into Reading Research through Nonalphabetic Lenses: Evidence from the Indian Languages. Topics in Language Disorders. 2002: 22(5): 30-31. Pratibha Karanth. 2003. Literacy and Language Processes -- Orthographic and Structural Effects. In Joe Rozario and Pratibha Karanth, editors, Learning Disabilities in India : Willing the Mind to Learn, Sage Publications. - Richard Sproat Richard Sproat Information Systems and Analysis Research rwsMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueresearch.att.com AT&T Labs -- Research, Shannon Laboratory 180 Park Avenue, Room B207, P.O.Box 971 Fax: +1-973-360-8077 Florham Park, NJ 07932-0000 - --------------http://www.research.att.com/~rws/-----------------------