Writing dictated words and picture names: Syllabic boundaries affect execution in Spanish

Applied Psycholinguistics

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 205-223

  Lvarez, Carlos J ^a   Cottrell, David ^b   Afonso, Olivia ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA LAGUNA   (Spain)

^b JAMES COOK UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70450163104     PISSN: 01427164     EISSN: 14691817     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0142716409090092     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Alameda, J. R., & Cuetos, F. (1995). Diccionario de frecuencia de las unidades ling̈uísticas del castellano. Oviedo, Spain: Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de Oviedo.
2. Á lvarez, C. J., Carreiras, M., & Perea, M. (2004). Are syllables phonological units in visual word recognition? Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 427-452.
3. Á lvarez, C. J., Carreiras, M., & Taft, M. (2001). Syllables and morphemes: Contrasting frequency effects in Spanish. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27, 545-555.
4. Bogaerts, H., Meulenbroek, R. G. J., & Thomassen, A. J. W. M. (1996). The possible role of the syllable as a processing unit in handwriting. In M. L. Simner, C. G. Leedham, & A. J. W. M. Thomassen (Eds.), Handwriting and drawing research: Basic and applied issues (pp. 115-126). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
5. Bradley, D. C., Śanchez-Casas, R. M., & Garciáa-Albea, J. E. (1993). The status of the syllable in the perception of Spanish and English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 197-233.
6. Buchwald, A., & Rapp, B. (2003). The orthographic representation of consonant-vowel status: Evidence from two cases of acquired dysgraphia. Brain and Language, 87, 120-121.
7. Buchwald, A.,&Rapp, B. (2006). Consonants and vowels in orthography. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23, 308-337.
8. Caramazza, A. (1988). Some aspects of language processing revealed through the analysis of acquired dysgraphia: The lexical system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 11, 395-421.
9. Caramazza, A., & Miceli, G. (1990). The structure of graphemic representations. Cognition, 37, 243-297.
10. Caramazza, A., Miceli, G.,Villa, G.,&Romani, C. (1987). The role of the graphemic buffer in spelling: Evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia. Cognition, 26, 59-85.
11. Carreiras, M., Alvarez, C. J., & de Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766-780.
12. Carreiras, M., & Perea, M. (2004). Naming pseudowords in Spanish: Effects of syllable frequency. Brain and Language, 90, 393-400.
13. Cottrell, D. (1999). SpellWrite Version 1.6 [Computer software and manual]. Retrieved from david.cottrell@jcu.edu.au
14. Damian, M. (2003). Articulatory duration in single-word speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 416-433.
15. Delattre, M., Bonin, P., & Barry, C. (2006). Written spelling to dictation: Sound-to-spelling regularity affects both writing latencies and durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 1330-1340.
16. Dell, G. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 96, 283-321.
17. Dell, G. (1988). The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Tests of predictions from a connectionist model. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 124-142.
18. Ellis, A. W. (1982). Spelling and writing (and reading and speaking). In A. W. Ellis (Ed.), Normality and pathology in cognitive functions. New York: Academic Press.
19. Ellis, A. W. (1988). Normal writing processes and peripheral acquired dysgraphias. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 99-127.
20. J́ond́ottir, M. K., Shallice, T., & Wise, R. (1996). Phonological mediation and the graphemic buffer disorder in spelling: Cross-language differences? Cognition, 59, 169-197.
21. Kandel, S., Á lvarez, C. J.,&Vallée, N. (2006). Syllables as processing units in handwriting production. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 18-31.
22. Kandel, S., & Valdois, S. (2006). Syllables as functional units in a copying task: A visuo-othographic and graphomotor approach. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 432-452
23. Kello, C. T., Plaut, D. C., & MacWhinney, B. (2000). The task dependence of staged vs. cascaded processing: An empirical and computational study of Stroop interference in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 129, 340-361.
24. Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Kellogg, R. T., Olive, T., & Piolat, A. (2007). Verbal, visual, and spatial working memory in written language production. Acta Psychologica, 124, 382-397.
26. Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Boston: MIT Press.
27. Mathey, S., & Zagar, D. (2002). Lexical similarity in visual word recognition: The effect of syllabic neighborhood in French. Current Psychology Letters: Behavior, Brain, and Cognition, 8, 107-121.
28. McCloskey, M., Badecker, W., Goodman-Schulman, R. A., & Aliminosa, D. (1994). The structure of graphemic representations in spelling: Evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11, 341-392.
29. Mehler, J., Dommergues, J. Y., Frauenfelder, U., & Seguí, J. (1981). The syllable's role in speech segmentation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 298-305.
30. Perfetti, C. A. (1997). The psycholinguistics of spelling and reading. In C. A. Perfetti & L. Rieben (Eds.), Learning to spell: Research, theory, and practice across languages. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Sage, K., & Ellis, A. (2004). Lexical influences in graphemic buffer disorder. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 381-400.
32. Sanfeliu, M. C., & Ferńandez, A. (1996). A set of 254 Snodgrass-Vanderwart pictures standardized for Spanish: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Behavior Research, Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 28, 537-555.
33. Sebastían-Galĺes, N., Dupoux, E., Seguí, J.,&Mehler, J. (1992). Contrasting syllabic effects in Catalan and Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 18-32.
34. Shallice, T. (1981). Phonological agraphia and the lexical route in writing. Brain, 104, 412-429.
35. Shallice, T., Rumiati, R. I., & Zadini, A. (2000). The selective impairment of the phonological output buffer. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 17, 517-546.
36. Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 6, 174-215.
37. Tainturier, M. J., & Caramazza, A. (1996). The status of double letters in graphemic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 53-73.
38. Tainturier, M. J., & Rapp, B. (2001). The spelling process. In B. Rapp (Ed.), What deficits reveal about the human mind/brain: A handbook of cognitive neuropsychology. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
39. van Galen, G. P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science, 10, 165-191.
40. Weingarten, R., Nottbusch, G., & Will, U. (2004). Morphemes, syllables, and graphemes in written word production. In T. Pechmann & C. Habel (Eds.), Multidisciplinary approaches to speech production (pp. 529-572). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
41. Wheeldon, L. R., & Lahiri, A. (2002). The minimal unit of phonological encoding: Prosodic or lexical word. Cognition, 85, 31-41.
42. Wing, A. M., & Baddeley, A. D. (1980). Spelling errors in handwriting: A corpus and a distributional analysis. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling. London: Academic Press.
43. Zesiger, P., Orliaguet, J. P., Böe, L. J., & Mounoud, P. (1994). The influence of syllabic structure in handwriting and typing production. In C. Faure, G. Lorette, & A. Vinter (Eds.), Advances in handwriting and drawing: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 389-401). Paris: Europia.