Programs for teaching English reading, especially for students with dyslexia, and educational practice standards often recommend instruction on dividing polysyllabic words into syllables. Syllable division is effort intensive and could inhibit fluency when reading in text. The division strategies might still be useful if they work so consistently that they will help students decode most unfamiliar polysyllabic words. No study of the English lexicon has confirmed that the pattern is highly consistent. This study addresses this gap in the literature. The utility of the two most frequently taught patterns was examined in a corpus analysis of 14,844 words from texts used in grades 1–8. The VC|CV pattern involves a single vowel (V), two consonants (CC), and another vowel. According to the expected pattern, the first vowel should have a short (lax) sound, such as the a in rabbit. This was true of 70.6% of instances in VCCV words in the corpus. For the V|CV pattern, the first vowel is expected have a long (tense) sound, such as the a in mason. This was true in 30.5% of instances in VCV words in the corpus. The patterns were more consistent for bisyllabic words than longer words (78.8% vs. 62.5% for VCCV words and 47.3% vs. 18.8% for VCV words, respectively). When comparing only short‐ and long‐vowel pronunciations (ignoring other sounds such as schwa), the first vowel followed the expected pattern in 94.3% instances of VCCV words and 53.3% of VCV words. The unreliability of VCV may not justify the effort required to use the strategy. There are implications for the debate about the science of reading.

中文翻译：

---

英语有有用的音节划分模式吗？

用于英语阅读的教学计划，尤其是针对有阅读障碍的学生，以及教育实践标准，通常建议您将多音节单词分为音节。音节划分是费力的，并且在阅读文本时可能会抑制流利性。如果划分策略始终如一地工作以至于它们将帮助学生解码大多数不熟悉的复音词，那么它们可能仍然有用。没有对英语词典的研究证实该模式是高度一致的。这项研究解决了文献中的这一空白。在对语文1–8年级中对14,844个单词的语料库分析中，考察了这两种最常教授的模式的效用。VC | CV模式包含一个元音（V），两个辅音（CC）和另一个元音。根据预期的模式，一个在兔子。语料库中VCCV单词中70.6％的实例确实如此。对于V | CV模式中，第一元音预期具有长的（式）的声音，如一个在泥瓦匠。语料库中VCV单词中30.5％的实例确实如此。双音节单词的模式比更长的单词更一致（VCCV单词分别为78.8％和62.5％，VCV单词分别为47.3％和18.8％）。仅比较短和长元音发音（忽略其他声音，例如schwa）时，在94.3％的VCCV单词实例和53.3％的VCV单词实例中，第一个元音遵循预期模式。VCV的不可靠性可能无法证明使用该策略需要付出的努力。关于阅读科学的辩论有启示。