• English
    • íslenska
  • English 
    • English
    • íslenska
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Journal Articles, Peer Reviewed (Ritrýndar vísindagreinar)
  • English Journal Articles (Peer Reviewed)
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Journal Articles, Peer Reviewed (Ritrýndar vísindagreinar)
  • English Journal Articles (Peer Reviewed)
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of HirslaCommunitiesAuthorsTitleSubjectsSubject (MeSH)Issue DateJournalThis CollectionAuthorsTitleSubjectsSubject (MeSH)Issue DateJournal

My Account

LoginRegister

Local Links

FAQ - (Icelandic)FAQ - (English)Hirsla LogosAbout LandspitaliLSH Home PageLibrary HomeIcelandic Journals

Statistics

Display statistics

Phonological mediation and the graphemic buffer disorder in spelling: cross-language differences?

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Average rating
 
   votes
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item. When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
 
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Authors
Jonsdottir, M K
Shallice, T
Wise, R
Issue Date
1996-05-01

Metadata
Show full item record
Citation
Cognition 1996, 59(2):169-97
Abstract
Caramazza and Miceli's (1990) theory of the organization of the graphemic buffer in writing is assessed by comparing the performance of an English language graphemic buffer patient, AS, with their Italian language patient, LB. In many qualitative and quantitative aspects the writing of the two patients is remarkably similar. However, there is no trace in the writing of AS of the relative preservation in writing words with simple-CV structures over ones with complex-CV structures found in LB, which was the basis for Caramazza and Miceli's hypothesis of an orthographic syllable tier in the organization of the graphemic buffer. Possible differences in the relative salience of syllables between Italian and English and of differences in regularity of the sound-to-spelling transformations in the two languages are considered. It is argued, however, that the fundamental difference may arise through a greater reliance on phonological mediation by LB, with the relatively preserved syllabic level organization in his writing being phonologically rather than orthographically based.
Description
To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field
Additional Links
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00693-1
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/0010-0277(95)00693-1
Scopus Count
Collections
English Journal Articles (Peer Reviewed)

entitlement

Related articles

  • Lexical morphology and its role in the writing process: evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia.
  • Authors: Badecker W, Hillis A, Caramazza A
  • Issue date: 1990 Jun
  • The graphemic buffer and attentional mechanisms.
  • Authors: Hillis AE, Caramazza A
  • Issue date: 1989 Feb
  • Vowels, syllables, and letter names: differences between young children's spelling in English and Portuguese.
  • Authors: Pollo TC, Kessler B, Treiman R
  • Issue date: 2005 Oct
  • The role of the Graphemic Buffer in spelling: evidence from a case of acquired dysgraphia.
  • Authors: Caramazza A, Miceli G, Villa G, Romani C
  • Issue date: 1987 Jun
  • Developmental graphemic buffer dysgraphia in English: A single case study.
  • Authors: Barisic K, Kohnen S, Nickels L
  • Issue date: 2017 May - Jun

DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.