Written language and the notion of 'lexicon'.

dc.creator	Uppstad, P.H.
dc.date	2006-05-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-07-20T22:27:33Z
dc.date.available	2015-07-20T22:27:33Z
dc.identifier	1567-6617
dc.identifier	1573-1731
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/b0cf13ceecae4aec90bdeb7e77b9534f
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/21827
dc.description	In mainstream theory about written language skills there is a strong relation between the notion of 'lexicon' and 'phonology'. The work of both researchers and teachers is rooted in this theoretical relation between lexicon and spoken language, which originates from the linguistic tradition of the past century. The problem with this position is that it has never been treated as a real hypothesis, and we should therefore not base our professional work on it without moderation. In the present article my aim is to show how different combinations of psychological and linguistic theories have different options and limitations concerning the relation between lexicon and phonology. In doing so, I claim that the mainstream theory of written language skills –particularly its relation between lexicon and phonology – is not the most plausible and defensible solution. In the present article I claim that it is possible to investigate the relation of speech and writing on a stronger empirical basis, and that this can be done by first giving equal validity to spoken and written language, and second by giving preference to theory with a minimum of introspection. The paper addresses researchers working with written language skills, and teachers who want to reflect on basic assumptions related to their profession. First, some assumptions concerning the mental lexicon in mainstream theory of written language skills are questioned. These assumptions are here linked to cognitivism and linguistic formalism. Second, alternative assumptions are derived from a pairing of functional approaches to language and connectionism. These alternative assumptions may be seen as contributions to a revitalized understanding of the connection between phonology and lexicon when studying written language skills.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	Springer
dc.relation	http://l1.publication-archive.com/next?cont=Ttane+F4aIc=
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1567-6617
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1573-1731
dc.rights	CC BY-NC-ND
dc.source	L1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, Vol 6, Iss 1, Pp 85-97 (2006)
dc.subject	Connectionism
dc.subject	Dyslexia
dc.subject	Lexical access
dc.subject	Mental lexicon
dc.subject	Phonology
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Theory and practice of education
dc.subject	LB5-3640
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.title	Written language and the notion of 'lexicon'.
dc.type	article