4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ontogenesis Model of the L2 Lexical Representation

      , ,
      Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
      Cambridge University Press (CUP)

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We introduce the blueprint of the Ontogenesis Model of the L2 Lexical Representation (OM) that focuses on the development of lexical representations. The OM has three dimensions: linguistic domains (phonological, orthographic, and semantic), mappings between domains, and networks of lexical representations. The model assumes that fuzziness is a pervasive property of the L2 lexicon: most L2 lexical representations are low resolution and the ontogenetic curve of their development does not reach the optimum (i.e., the ultimate stage of their attainment with optimal encoding) in one or more dimensions. We review the findings on lexical processing and vocabulary training to show that the OM has a potential to provide an interpretation for the results that have been treated separately and to move us forward in building a comprehensive model of L2 lexical acquisition and processing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references119

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Learning Vocabulary in Another Language

          I. Nation (2001)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies.

              Several previous studies have suggested that basic decoding skills may develop less effectively in English than in some other European orthographies. The origins of this effect in the early (foundation) phase of reading acquisition are investigated through assessments of letter knowledge, familiar word reading, and simple nonword reading in English and 12 other orthographies. The results confirm that children from a majority of European countries become accurate and fluent in foundation level reading before the end of the first school year. There are some exceptions, notably in French, Portuguese, Danish, and, particularly, in English. The effects appear not to be attributable to differences in age of starting or letter knowledge. It is argued that fundamental linguistic differences in syllabic complexity and orthographic depth are responsible. Syllabic complexity selectively affects decoding, whereas orthographic depth affects both word reading and nonword reading. The rate of development in English is more than twice as slow as in the shallow orthographies. It is hypothesized that the deeper orthographies induce the implementation of a dual (logographic + alphabetic) foundation which takes more than twice as long to establish as the single foundation required for the learning of a shallow orthography.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
                Bilingualism
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                1366-7289
                1469-1841
                March 2022
                June 17 2021
                March 2022
                : 25
                : 2
                : 185-201
                Article
                10.1017/S1366728921000250
                49299b7d-4cee-45ca-862d-a9c5f61623a2
                © 2022

                Free to read

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article