120
There are wider variations in individual progress in learning to read in languages with inconsistent orthographies, with more cases of dyslexia amongst their readers (Seymour et al., 2003). This supports the suggestion that learning to read in opaque orthographies
demands the development of a wider range or greater use of cognitive skills than learning to read in consistent, transparent orthographies. In addition to using large grain size cues as suggested above, readers of opaque orthographies may need to draw more on knowledge of syntax and vocabulary than readers of transparent orthographies (Share, 2008), and they may have to develop greater proficiency in using contextual cues.
However, could it be possible that all these learning demands might ultimately pay off for English readers in the form of significantly increased automaticity, with the associated benefits of extremely rapid and efficient reading in comparison with readers of languages which do not require the development of these strategies?
121
along lines of text, instantly recognising and transforming textual elements into the “flow of phonetic imagery through the mind” (Coulmas 2003, p. 214) that is the hallmark and
cognitive essence of fluent silent reading. Textual elements recognised could be single words, or words in a familiar or predictable string, or elements within complex single word
constructions.
WORDS SKIPPED
Short, familiar, predictable words are often skipped by the point of focus of efficient readers (2003, Rayner 2009, Paterson et al., 2011). In English 25% - 30% of words are skipped by practised readers (White 2008, Rayner 2009). This suggests that readers predict words to the right of their point of focus, and if the indefinite shape perceived in the parafoveal visual area matches the reader‟s prediction, they take the word as read without a direct fixation (Paterson et al., 2011), and proceed directly to the next one. This process may be further facilitated by learned, expected, word collocations.
WORDS READ IN SINGLE FIXATIONS
In a process similar to competent readers‟ word skipping, words that are recognised on the basis of single, brief fixations are probably identified automatically on the basis of a memory of the word form, and strong association of this form with the piece of language it represents.
As with skipped words, instantaneous perception may be facilitated by the partial view that readers get of the word just before it is focussed on directly (Rayner 2009, Paterson, et al., 2011), and recognition may be aided by anticipated word collocations. In English text, words of 6 - 9 letters are the most likely to be read in a single fixation (New et al., 2006).
IN READING OF CONTINUOUS TEXT
Automaticised recognition of words may be influenced by nothing other than the perception of each printed word itself in reading isolated words (Ehri, 2007). However, when reading entire passages of text, readers‟ recognition of words is likely to be aided (or hindered) as they anticipate much of the text on the basis of familiar collocations, prior knowledge, suppositions activated during the reading process and their construction of meaning of the text read so far, as well as information gained from text read just prior to that in focus (Rapp
& van den Broek 2005). These factors will inevitably differ between readers and from one situation to another. Even within a sentence, exposure to a complex word facilitates
122
recognition of a semantically related word later in the sentence (Paterson et al., 2011). Thus, in reading of continuous text, a number of factors other than the perceptual stimulus of each word appear to affect automaticity.
E
YE MOVEMENTS POINTING TO A LACK OF AUTOMATICITYIn eye movement records, a high frequency of refixations and regressions implies that a reader is not experiencing the benefit of automatic recognition of many words, and thus is not experiencing much of Coulmas‟ (2003) mental flow of phonetic imagery.
REFIXATIONS
In English, readers take on average longer to recognise multisyllabic words than short ones.
Words incorporating more than 9 letters are often read with more than one fixation, and each syllable adds on average 20 ms to recognition time in studies of lexical decision making (New et al., 2006). This is in line with Paterson‟s observation (2011) that visual recognition of English words composed of multiple morphemes (for example “multisyllabic”) is likely to depend on breakdown into constituent morphemes.
REGRESSIONS
Regressions show that a reader is referring back to “problem areas in the text, such as
syntactic or semantic complexities or word identification problems” (Paulson 2005 p. 342). In reading records of fluent readers of English text, regressions make up not more than 10% – 15% of eye movements (Rayner 2009).
Causes of regressions include awkward syntax, low frequency words, confusion,
disconfirmation of an interpretation, difficulties in word identification, incomplete lexical processing, overshooting or undershooting the beginning of a line, or returning to words skipped on a first reading (Paulson 2005). Paterson et al. (2011) note readers‟ tendency to make inter-word regressions on the second of two related morphologically complex words in a sentence, and suggest that similarity between word forms sometimes inhibits recognition, perhaps when readers make an unwarranted supposition that the second word is a recurrence
123
of the first. For example, a reader reading a sentence containing both the words „universality‟
and „university‟ might misread whichever comes second, having expected a repetition of the first.
When making regressions, it does seem that readers maintain a sense of the spatial
arrangement of words in text in relation to what they have understood of the text as they read, and are able to return their point of focus to parts of the text that might have been problematic for them (Rayner et al., 1998). This suggests that popular assumptions that regressions and re-readings result in jumbled processing of words are erroneous, and that readers maintain a sense of the structure of meaning in text they are reading even when shifting their gaze to different parts of sentences to search for information to aid their construction of meaning (Paulson, 2005). Information sought might relate to a reader‟s attention shifts, or their schemas and their association with elements of the text, or to particular textual elements salient for the construction of meaning (Paulson, 2005).
Since readers often redirect their point of focus to points in text that caused them difficulty, analysis of recorded eye movements is likely to reveal features in text that attract regressions most frequently.
The body of research on various aspects of how we acquire and execute different reading skills is growing, yet because of the multiplicity of contexts, languages and orthographies in which reading skills are practised, questions remain unanswered, particularly in relation to orthographies and languages other than English.