当前位置: X-MOL 学术Read. Res. Q. › 论文详情
Is the Science of Reading Just the Science of Reading English?
Reading Research Quarterly ( IF 3.543 ) Pub Date : 2021-04-28 , DOI: 10.1002/rrq.401
David L. Share

The science of reading has made genuine progress in understanding reading and the teaching of reading, but is the science of reading just the science of reading English? Worldwide, a majority of students learn to read and write in non‐European, nonalphabetic orthographies such as abjads (e.g., Arabic), abugidas/alphasyllabaries (e.g., Hindi), or morphosyllabaries (e.g., Chinese). Over a decade ago, I argued that the extreme inconsistency of English spelling–sound correspondence had confined the science of reading to an insular, Anglocentric research agenda addressing theoretical and applied issues with limited relevance for a universal science of reading. Here, I ask if the science of reading has moved forward. Acknowledging some limited progress over the past decade, it is evident that even today, mainstream reading research remains entrenched in Anglocentrism, Eurocentrism, and another form of ethnocentrism that I call alphabetism. Even the two dominant theoretical frameworks for describing cross‐script diversity, orthographic depth and psycholinguistic grain size theory, give little or no consideration to non‐European alphabets or nonalphabetic scripts, promoting a one‐dimensional view of script variation (i.e., spelling–sound consistency). Consideration of the full spectrum of the world’s languages and writing systems reveals multiple dimensions of writing system complexity, each liable to create obstacles for the developing reader. If the science of reading is to contribute meaningfully to assessment, diagnosis, instruction, and intervention for all readers around the world, then we must extricate our field from entrenched ethnocentrism and embrace global diversity.

中文翻译:

阅读科学只是阅读英语的科学吗?

阅读科学在理解阅读和阅读教学方面取得了真正的进步,但是阅读科学仅仅是阅读英语的科学吗?在世界范围内,大多数学生学习以非欧洲,非字母拼写法(例如abjads(例如阿拉伯语),abugidas / alphasyllabaries(例如印地语)或morphosyllabaries(例如中文))进行读写。十多年前,我认为英语拼写-声音对应的极端不一致已将阅读科学限制在一个孤立的,以英语为中心的研究议程中,该议程涉及与普遍阅读科学相关性有限的理论和应用问题。在这里,我问阅读科学是否向前发展了。承认过去十年中取得的有限进展,很明显,即使在今天,主流阅读研究仍然根植于盎格鲁中心主义,欧洲中心主义和我称之为字母主义的另一种民族中心主义。即使是用于描述跨脚本多样性的两个主要理论框架,正交深度和心理语言粒度理论,也很少或根本没有考虑非欧洲字母或非字母脚本,从而促进了脚本变化的一维视图(即拼写-声音)。一致性)。对世界上所有语言和写作系统的全面考虑揭示了写作系统复杂性的多个方面,每一个方面都有可能为发展中的读者带来障碍。如果阅读科学能够为全世界所有读者做出有意义的贡献,以帮助他们进行评估,诊断,指导和干预,
更新日期:2021-04-29
全部期刊列表>>
欢迎新作者ACS
聚焦环境污染物
专攻离子通道生理学研究
中国作者高影响力研究精选
虚拟特刊
屿渡论文,编辑服务
浙大
上海中医药大学
苏州大学
江南大学
四川大学
灵长脑研究中心
毛凌玲
南开大学陈瑶
朱如意
中科院
南开大学
隐藏1h前已浏览文章
课题组网站
新版X-MOL期刊搜索和高级搜索功能介绍
ACS材料视界
华辉
天合科研
x-mol收录
试剂库存
down
wechat
bug