Revista Interamericana de Psicologa/Interamerican Journal of Psychology - 2011, Vol. 45, Num. 2, pp.

263-270

Phonological awareness:
Cross-linguistic comparisons with a focus on Spanish

>

Amanda Clinton'
Maria Quiones

University of Puerto Rico, Mayagiiez, Puerto Rico

CO

Catherine Christo
California State University, Sacramento

Resume
El propsito de la revisin de la literatura actual es poner de relieve las diferencias y similitudes en
procesos fundamentales de lectura segn el idioma del alumno. Se presta especial atencin a los contrastes entre el idioma Ingls que es relativamente opaco y otros idiomas que son mas transparentes, con
un enfoque especfico en el espaol. El Anlisis de la literatura indica un desarrollo ms pronunciado
curvar en idiomas como el espaol, aunque los procesos son similares. Resultados ponen de relieve la
forma en el que una lengua matema ms opaca podra informar el aprendizaje de un Segundo y ms
transparente idioma.
Palabras clave: Fonologa, Espaol, lenguaje
Conciencia fonolgica: Comparaciones lingsticas cruzadas con un enfoque en el espaol
Abstract
The purpose of the present literature review is to highlight differences and similarities in
fundamental reading processes depending upon the language of the learner. Specific attention is
paid to contrasts between the relatively opaque English language and more transparent languages,
with a specific focus on Spanish. Analysis of the literature indicates a steeper developmental
curve in languages such as Spanish, although processes are similar. Findings highlight the way
in which a more opaque native language could inform learning of a second, more transparent
language.
Keywords: Phonology, Spanish, language

Early identification of individuals at risk for reading difficulties is an issue of critical importance for
psychologists and educators, as well as for dyslexic
children and their families. Research over the past 20
years has elucidated the component processes involved
in reading acquisition (Adams,' 1990). The successful
beginning reader readily acquires the alphabetic principle (Perfetti, 1994; Wagner & Torgesen, 1987), or
the understanding that print stands for specific sounds
in language, thereby initiating a process of reciprocal
causation between phonological awareness (PA) and
reading (Stahl & Murray, 1994; Stanovich, 1981). That
is, as children learn to read, their familiarity with
common letter patterns aids in the development of automatic word recognition. As such, theories of reading
acquisition emphasize reciprocity between processes
(e.g., Perfetti, 1992).

' University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, PR; email: amanda.clinton@gmail.com

Although provocative conclusions about the process

of learning to read may be drawn from the literature on
PA, the majority of this research pertains to the English language. Recent cross-linguistic studies utilizing
subjects speaking languages other than English have
provided data indicating the presence of subtle differences in the reading acquisition process (e.g., Landerl,
Wimmer, & Frith, 1997, Zeigler & Goswani, 2005).
These studies are important because they help distinguish between those universal components of reading
acquisition and those that are a function of particular
orthographic and phonological systems.
Cross-linguistic research indicates that the degree of
regularity in an orthography makes a significant difference in the accuracy and ease with which children
decode words (Brck, Genesee, & Caravolas, 1997;
Seymour, Aro & Erskine, 2003). Traditional PA (sound/
symbol matching) tasks - strong predictors of reading
ability in English - do not distinguish well between
readers of languages of near-l:l sound-symbol cor-

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

AMANDA CLINTON, MARA OUIONES, CATHERINE CHRISTO

264

respondence, like Spanish. This suggests differential

weights for respective processes in early reading. Since
the world is increasingly multi-lingual and many children in Latin America learn both English and Spanish,
a review of the literature of reading acquisition processes considering the more transparent Spanish versus
the relatively opaque English can offer key insights into
normative and disabled reading acquisition and, in turn,
illuminate assessment and intervention.
The goal of this review is to discuss the role that
phonological awareness plays in learning to read across
languages with a focus on Spanish. It is critical to begin widening our lens from its predominant focus on
English in order for psychologists to complete meaningful assessments and design effective interventions.
In the pages that follow, a review of the research on
PA in English speaking populations will be presented.
Cross-linguistic studies analyzing PA follows. Finally,
a section specific to Spanish is presented. Conclusions
complete the article.
Phonological Awareness in English
Phonological awareness plays an important role
in learning to read in English. The results of a large
number of studies demonstrate a strong and consistent
relationship between children's abilities to analyze
sounds in the stream of speech and their progress in
learning to read (e.g.. Ball & Blachman, 1991; Castles
& Coltheart, 2004; Uhry & Clark, 2004; Shaywitz,
2003; Wagner & Torgesen, 1987). Indeed, identification
of the key role of PA in the reading process is considered one of the great successes of modern psychology
(Stanovich, 1987).
While a consensus exists regarding the importance
of PA in learning to read, debate surrounds its specific
contribution to word reading (e.g., Ehri, 1992; Goswami
& Bryant, 1990; Moris, Alegria, & Content, 1987;
Scarborough, 2005). Although the connection is almost
certainly bidirectional (Stahl & Murray, 1998), the
specific nature of the pathway between PA and reading
continues to be defined. Some researchers describe PA
as "a powerful determinant of the speed and efficiency
of learning to read" (Goswami & Bryant, 1992, p. 49)
while others deem phonemic awareness essential but
not determinant (Nation & Hulme, 1997).
Reciprocal processes between PA and reading include success with simple phoneme awareness tasks,
such as initial consonant segmentation, prior to simple
word recognition. However, some recognition of words
typically precedes more advanced PA abilities, such as
deletion, (e.g., Stahl & Murray, 1994). Causal influences
between kindergarten letter name knowledge and PA,
as well as between PA and first- and second- grade
decoding skills also indicate reciprocity between PA

and word reading (Goswami, 1993; Wagner, Torgesen,

& Rashotte, 1994).
Cross-Language Phonological Awareness
Phonological awareness clearly plays an important
role in reading English. The cross- language literature
does not possess the depth of the English language
literature, yet a number of studies indicate a relationship between reading progress and success at PA tasks
in languages such as Swedish (Lundberg, Olofsson, &
Wall, 1980), German (Nslund, Schneider, & van der
Broek, 1997), and Italian (Cossu et al., 1988), among
others. The importance of the phonemic structure of
words varies according to the particular characteristics
of a language (e.g., Caravolas & Brck, 1993; Cossu et
al., 1988; Korkeamki, 1997).
Languages differ widely in the complexity of their
phonological structures. For example, the number of
distinguishable vowels, the incidence of morphophonemic alternation, and the diversity of syllable types
frequently vary (Cossu et al, 1988 Ziegler & Goswami,
2005). For this reason, a number of authors have
explored the possibility that the level of difficulty associated with the analysis of words into syllables, onsetrime units, and phonemes might vary across languages
(e.g.. Brck, Genesee, & Caravolas, 1997; Cossu et al.,
1988; Wentink, van Bon, & Schreuder, 1997) and, thus,
influence the relationship between PA and reading (e.g..
Cossu et al., 1988; Nslund et al, 1997). For example,
Pugh (2006) indicates that while a deficit in PA may be
the core deficit for struggling readers, it will manifest
differently across languages. The complexities of PA
depend on the phonological and orthographic aspects
of a language, as observed from studies in Swedish
(Lundberg, Oloffsson, & Wall, 1980), Italian (Cossu et
al., 1988), and Greek (Loizou & Stuart, 2003). Results
of Swedish research support the relationship..between
rhyme tasks and reading progress, similar to English.
The Italian study confirmed a developmental curve
for PA tasks, which is also observed in the English
language. Greek and English, meanwhile, influenced
one another as each was learned.
While a number of similarities surface between PA
and reading across languages, differences exist as
well. Higher success rates and sharper developmental
curves on PA measures are commonly associated with
transparent languages, such as Italian (Cossu et al.,
1998), Dutch (Wentink, van Bon, & Schreuder, 1997),
Spanish (Manrique & Gramigna, 1984), and Finnish
(Korleamki, 1997). Differential levels of awareness of
onsets in the highly transparent Czech also suggests
that the development of PA is shaped by the nature of
the phonological and orthographic input associated
with a particular language (Caravolas & Brck, 1993).

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS: CROSS-LINGUISTIC COMPARISONS WITH A FOCUS ON SPANISH

Cossu et al. (1988) explain that the quantitative difference in the degree of accuracy found between the
Italian and English subject performance on measures of
PA - where Italians made considerably fewer errors and
essentially achieved results at ceiling levels of longer
length than those administered to the American children - is due to the structure of each language. Italian
has a simpler open-syllable form and utilizes a small
number of syllable types, thus making analysis into
syllables relatively easy compared to English, with its
elosed-syllables and considerable variation of syllable
types. This uniformity of correspondenee between
letters and phonemes in transparent languages sueh as
Italian is hypothesized to facilitate the development of
sensitivity to sublexieal structures, a skill that may have
to be directly taught in English due to its orthographic
irregularity.
Additional data offers support for the syllable, as
opposed to the onset-rime, as the key decoding unit
in languages with greater transparency than English.
Freneh-speaking kindergarten students have been
observed to perform better than English-speaking
peers on syllable counting measures, while the English
children perform better than the French on onset-rime
and phoneme items (Brck, Genesee & Caravolas,
1997). Similarly, a study of Dutch children reported
an absence of onset-rime effects in a training program
aimed at improving PA skills via decoding instruction (van den Boseh, 1991). The author hypothesizes
that patterns of performance on certain phonological
awareness measures mirror the structure of a particular
language. Indeed, research indicates that phonological
reeoding is not significantly challenging for readers of
regular languages even as young as preschool (Castles,
Wilson & Coltheart, 2010). This finding contradicts the
idea of a core phonological processing deficit which has
been supported in English research on disabled readers.
Conclusions from information collected using
Finnish (Korkeamki, 1997), Italian (Cossu et al, 1988),
and French (Bruek et al., 1997) suggest that speakers
of regular languages may automatically acquire the
alphabetic principle, without the presence of direct
instruction. In other words, use of a language with a
regular orthography provides daily phonemic training
for the learner, particularly with the commencement of
reading instruction. For example, in Bruck's study of
French children (1997) who were exposed to considerably fewer early literacy opportunities at school, at
home, and from the media, few repercussions in word
recognition skills were observed in first grade. They
made fewer errors on word recognition tests (French
24% errors v. English 48%) and nonsense-word reading measures (French 37% errors v. English 64%) than
English-speaking peers from print rich environments.

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

Phonological Awareness in the Spanish

Language
Spanish, like English, is an Indo-European language.
As a direct descendent of Latin, however, Spanish falls
into the romance language category along with French,
Italian, Portuguese, and Catalan, among others. It has
18 consonants and 5 vowels, in contrast to English,
which uses 24 consonants and 12 to 14 vowels (Merino,
1992). The syllabic structure of Spanish is relatively
simple due to the predominance of CVCV (55.94 percent) patterns in its words. Syllable types that pose
greater difficulties on phonological segmentation tasks,
such as CCV clusters with liquids, are rare in Spanish
(3.5 percent). The voealie consists of five vowels with
well differentiated areas and allows for clearer recognition of sounds than English. Further, being a regular
language with a largely transparent orthography,
sound by sound translation into letters typically
renders a conventional spelling or an orthographically acceptable substitute (Borzone de Manrique &
Signorini, 1994). Irregular words effectively do not
exist in Spanish. This language also possesses a better
defined syllabie structure than does English (Manrique
& Graminga, 1984). As a result, the consistency of
the orthographic system and the saliency of the syllable are frequently emphasized during early reading
instruction.
As with English and Italian, Spanish-speaking
children demonstrate a developmental curve for phonological awareness skills. A study using Argentinean
subjects showed that syllabic segmentation is more
readily mastered than phonemic segmentation in
Spanish (Manrique & Gramigna, 1984). In fact, the
tapping task appears to be understood by both skilled
and unskilled readers of Spanish by first grade (Borzone de Manrique & Signorini, 1994). This method
of measuring phonemic segmentation seems to be
so straightforward for Spanish- speaking subjects
that, at least from kindergarten forward, meaningful
correlations between it and reading are not typically
found (Manrique et al., 1994). More complicated PA
batteries, which include PA tasks at both the rhyme
and phonemic levels, are mastered at a younger age in
Spanish speakers than in speakers of English, as well
(Carillo, 1994; Nation & Hulme, 1997).
Linguistic effects specific to the Spanish language
have been isolated on PA tasks. Jimnez and Haro
(1995) repeated a Treiman and Weatherston (1992)
study using Spanish- speaking subjects in order to
investigate whether findings relevant to American
children apply to those in Spain. Findings indicated
several distinctions. Five and 6-year-old English
speaking children separated the onset of a word when

o
CO

AMANDA CLINTON, M A R I A OUIONES, CATHERINE CHRISTO

266
CO

O
3
O

it began with a stop consonant with greater ease than

those commencing with fricatives. In Spanish, words
beginning with continuant consonants (/s/, /m/, lil, Id)
were easier than those beginning with stop consonants
(/p/, /b/, /g/, /d/). The Jimnez and Haro (1995) study
also reported that syllable-initial consonant clusters
presented a challenge to Spanish speakers and floor
effects were observed in the youngest participants.
To evaluate the effects of word length in PA performance, Jimnez and Haro (1995) compared children's
ability to segment the onset from CVC and CV'CVCV
structures. Participants obtained higher scores on
shorter, rather than longer words, with a greater effect
for thefive-year-olds.These findings, however, contrast
with those of Cossu et al. (1988) who included two-,
three, and four-syllable words in their investigation of
PA in Italian, a language very similar to Spanish, did
not have a deleterious effect on performance.
The syllable has been identified as a particularly
salient unit in Spanish word recognition (Jimnez
& Valle, 2000). A comparison of average 9-year-old
readers, a group of 9-year-old children with reading
impairments, and a reading-level matched group of
younger subjects demonstrated a significant interaction between reading level and syllable position for the
younger subjects. Words with low frequency syllables
challenged young readers, while reading-disabled
subjects were not affected. Further, nonwords were
recognized more quickly when they contained highfrequency syllables. Authors interpret these results as
indicative of the importance of the syllable in Spanish.
Durgunolglu, Nagy, and Hancin-Bhatt (1993) similarly
argued that the perfect mean score achieved by 31 firstgraders on their syllable segmentation tasks indicates
that "in Spanish, as in English, syllables are an easier
speech unit to manipulate than are phonemes or onsetrime units" (p. 458).
Phonological awareness and reading in
Spanish
Goldstain & Cintrn (2001) researched the phonological skills of Puerto Rican, Spanish- speaking
2-year-olds to determine PA patterns specific to
Spanish as compared to those commonly exhibited
by speakers of a variety of languages. They predicted
that similarities in results across languages "may be
indicative of more universal tendencies in phonological acquisition" (p. 355). Syllable structure, number of
final consonants, number of consonant clusters, and
types of deletions demonstrated similarities across
languages. Differences between Spanish-speakers and
speakers of other languages included types of cluster
reductions, word length, and substitution patterns. The
authors reported that cross-linguistic differences may

show possible language or dialect-specific refinements

made by children.
Correlations between word reading and phonological
awareness have been demonstrated in cross-linguistic
studies of native Spanish speakers attending school in
English-speaking countries. Durgunolglu, Nagy, and
Hancin-Bhatt (1993) administered Spanish language
tests of PA to 31 first grade students of Latin descent
who were learning to read in English, although their
native language was Spanish. Results showed that
Spanish PA was strongly related to both word and
pseudoword reading (r= .51 and r= .68, respectively) of
English. Spanish word recognition, as well as performance on Spanish PA, yielded significant beta weights
and predicted English word recognition. Regression
analyses indicated that PA was a significant predictor of
performance on word recognition tests both within and
across languages. The authors hypothesize that it was
likely that those children who were able to reflect on one
language possessed the metalinguistic skills to reflect
on their second language, as well. Thus, they suggest
that phonological awareness is not developed specific
to a particular language. Cisero and Royer (1995) also
isolated evidence for transfer of phonological awareness skills, with English reading in their sample of 36
first-graders of Puerto Rican background.
Carrillo (1994) carried out a detailed study addressing the relationship of PA to reading with a group of
68 kindergarten and 52 first grade children in Spain.
Results support the Goswami & Bryant (1992) theory
of reading in which children acquire rhyme and alliteration skills prior to reading acquisition, at which
point they learn to analyze words phonemically. Even
the youngest subjects, half of whom were nonreaders,
found the aforementioned tasks manageable. Initial
deletion, final isolation, and counting and reversal
of segments were extremely difficult tasks that occasionally led to floor effects. By first grade, however,
scores on each type of task were similar. All PA tasks
correlated with word decoding in kindergarten. In first
grade, however, significant correlations for rhyme and
alliteration tasks were obtained.
Evidence for the use of analogy in reading Spanish surfaced in an investigation by Sebastian-Galles
and Vacchiano (1995), where children from six years
demonstrated its use in pseudoword reading. Age-based
variance in error patterns suggested that analogical
reading errors and lexicalization correspond to different mechanisms (e.g., Defior, Justicia, & Martos, 1996;
Valle-Arroyo, 1996). Lexicalizations may result from
inaccurate orthographic processing, while analogical
errors could reflect failures in phonological decoding
that are affected to some degree by the reader's lexical
knowledge. This data is considered "consistent with the

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS: CROSS-LINGUISTIC COMPARISONS WITH A FOCUS ON SPANISH

prediction of easy and early access to [the phonological]

route in Spanish" (Moris, 1995, p. 3).
In a study conducted by Quiroga et al. (2002), 30
Spanish-speaking English-as-a-second- language first
graders from immigrant families, all of whom received
all their school instruction in English, responded to a
battery of Spanish and English measures of phonological awareness. Verbal IQ, oral language proficiency,
and single-word reading (real words and pseudowords).
The authors hypothesized that phonological awareness
and letter knowledge in Spanish would predict phonological awareness and word reading in English. That
is, that PA transfers across first and second languages
and across oral and written language. Results showed
that the Spanish phonological awareness measure was
significantly correlated with the English phonological
measure. The authors concluded that "phonological
awareness is related to learning to read English when
one's first language is Spanish and reading instruction
is in English" (p. 97). Friesen and Jared (2007) obtained
similar findings in their study with English-French
bilinguals.
Similar to children involved in studies in English
(e.g., Christensen, 1997; Wagner, Torgensen, &
Rashotte, 1994), Spanish-speaking subjects demonstrate variability in patterns of phonological awareness
skill acquisition and reading development (Carello,
Lukatelz, & Turvey, 1994). In other words, certain
PA tasks do not always precede the ability to read and
reading ability does not necessarily indicate successful
phoneme manipulation. Some kindergartens who could
read 15% of words on a reading test (the criterion level
established by the author to distinguish readers from
non-readers) performed poorly on PA tasks. Others
who obtained above average scores on PA tasks of
sound similarities and/or measures involving detection or isolation of segments scored low in reading.
Interestingly, these subjects attended schools in which
phonics was deemphasized in favor of whole-word
instruction. The author concluded - contrary to what
has been proposed in other highly regular languages
such as Finnish and Italian - that some amount of
training may be required for individuals to acquire a
"full development of phonological awareness" (p. 295).
Method of instruction, therefore, may impact the ability
to acquire the alphabetic principle in languages like
Spanish where grapheme-phoneme correspondences
are largely one-to-one. This finding calls into question
the hypothesis that regular languages permit automatic
acquisition of the alphabetic principle in context, without the necessity of phonics drills (e.g.. Cossu et al.,
1988; Korkeamki, 1997).

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

Conciusions
In a world that is becoming increasingly multilingual, the question of linguistic differences and
similarities, as well as the influence of one language
on another in terms of normative and aberrant reading
processes is key. This issue may be particularly pressing in relation to the question of English, a notoriously
inconsistent language in terms of letter sounds and
letter symbols, and Spanish, a very regular language,
due to the high numbers of Spanish- speaking children attending school in the United States or learning
English in their native countries (Barnwell, 2008).
Psychologists should possess a solid understanding
of this issue and its linguistic implications in order to
conduct meaningful assessments and ensure design of
useful interventions. The current review addressed the
need to expand knowledge of phonological awareness
and orthographic processing as fundamental to learning to read across languages.
The PA literature based on English-speaking populations provides a rich foundation upon which researchers
can now address particular aspects of phonological
processing. Current information clearly indicates that
PA skills are critical to the acquisition of word reading.
Debate still surrounds the issue of the developmental
process through which children gain PA and the point
at which reciprocal influences between an awareness
of individual sounds in the speech stream and basic
literacy knowledge begin to influence one another.
However, it is certain that PA is necessary but not
sufficient to explain reading acquisition. While letter
knowledge and reasoning skills contribute, more specific skills such as knowledge of orthographic patterns
are of key importance. Overall, it is easy to agree with
Stanovich's (1981) assertion that identification of the
role of PA in early English literacy is one of the research
community's great successes. As with English, PA appears to be related to word reading across languages,
including German, Swedish, Finnish, and Italian, and
others, although differently. Recent research indicates
that this relationship may be weaker in more transparent languages than in English. A developmental
curve, wherein syllables are mastered prior to measures requiring isolation of individual phonemes, has
been confirmed as a cross-linguistic phenomenon.
The question seems to be one of whether or not PA
tasks are related to reading across languages, but one
of identifying the precise details and importance of
the relationship depending on the particular language
spoken by young readers.
While phonological awareness skills appear earlier
and tasks correlate more strongly with reading performance in relatively transparent orthographies with an

o
CO

AMANDA CLINTON, M A R I A QUIONES, CATHERINE CHRISTO

268
CO

O
O

emphasis on the syllable rather than English's prosodie

stress, the situation is not clear cut. Not just the regularity of grapheme-phoneme correspondences and natural
syllabic breaks in words affect PA, but whether the
frequent syllable form is open or predominantly closed
may influence saliency and impact performance on PA
tasks (Delattre, 1966; Peters, 1997).
The primary focus of the current review being Spanish, it is important to summarize findings related to
this language. Studies of phonological awareness in the
Spanish language demonstrate certain similarities and
differences when considered in comparison to English.
A developmental curve, wherein syllabic segmentation
is acquired prior to phonemic segmentation can be seen
in both groups, as in other languages. However, readers
of transparent languages like Spanish appear to experience a considerably more rapid acquisition curve in PA
skills. While certain phonological awareness tasks tend
to be mastered prior to reading acquisition in Spanish,
this is not an invariable pattern. Particular linguistic
aspects of languages appear to have particular effects
on performance of phonological awareness measures
with syllable-initial clusters, for example, presenting particular difficulty for Spanish speakers. Some
evidence has been found for the role of rhyming and
alliteration as precursors to reading among children
from Spain. These findings parallel those found among
English- speaking subjects. Like English speakers,
Spanish speakers appear to present a deficit, as opposed
to a delay, in reading if the impairment is defined as
poor nonsense-word reading. The details of the similarities and contrasts between reading difficulties in
Spanish and English remain to be delineated, however.
In fact, although many similarities exist between the
two languages, PA tasks actually account for considerably less variance in Spanish reading than they do
in English-speaking children. Thus, while particular
aspects of the linguistic puzzle of reading acquisition
in Spanish can be explained, a number of pieces have
yet to be put in place.
In sum, early readers of relatively transparent languages tend toward rapid acquisition of phonological
awareness and orthographic processing skills. By
comparison, learning to read in a relatively opaque
orthography implies a steeper learning curve in relation
to phonological and orthographic information due to
the numerous irregularities in terms of sound-symbol
relationships. As such, fluency - often measured by
rapid naming tasks - may be a much better indicator of
early reading skill than phonology or orthography when
one is attempting to evaluate early literacy in Spanish.
Psychologists should carefully consider this prior to
utilizing translated versions of tests considered strong
predictors of reading that were designed based upon

the English language, since their clinical significance

is not equivalent.
References
Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read. Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
Ball, E., & Blachman, B. (1991). Does phonemes awareness training in Kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 49-66.
Barnwell, D. (2008). The status of Spanish in the United States.
Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 23(2), 235-243.
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Thompson, J., Wagner, R., Swanson, H. L., Wijsman, E. M., & Raskind, W. (2006). Modeling
phonological core deficits within a working memory architecture in children and adults with developmental dyslexia.
Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 165-198
Borzone de Manrique, A.M., & Signorin, A. (1994). Phonological
awareness, spelling and reading abilities in Spanish-speaking children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64,
429-439.
Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read - a causal connection. Nature, 301,419-421.
Brck, M., Genesee, F., & Caravolas, M. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early literacy acquisition. In B. Blachman (Ed.),
Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implicationsfor early intervention (pp. 145-162). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bryant, P.E., & Goswami, U. (1987). Phonological awareness and
learning to read. In J. Beech & A. Colley (Eds.), Cognitive
approaches to reading (pp. 213-243). New York: Wiley.
Caravolas, M. & Brck, M. (1993). The effect of oral and written language input on children's phonological awareness: A
cross-linguistic study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 1-30.
Carello, C , Lukatelz, G., & Turvey, M. (1994). Lexical involvement in naming does not contravene prelexical phonology:
Comment on Sebastian-Gales (1991). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and performance, 20,
192-198.
Carillo, M. (1994). Development of phonological awareness and
reading acquisition: A study in the Spanish language. Reading and Writing, (5(3), 279-298.
Carreireas, M., Alvarez, C , & De Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual Word recognition in Spanish. Journal of
Memory and Language, 32, 766-780.
Castles, A., & Coltheart, M. (2004). Is there a causal link from
phonological awareness to success in learning to read? Cognition, 91, 77-lllChristensen, C. (1997). Onset, rhymes, and
phonemes in learning to read. Scientific Studies of Reading,
I, 341-358.
Castles, A., Wilson, K., & Coltheart, M. (2010). Early orthographic influences on phonemic awareness tasks: Evidence from
a preschool training study. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology, IO8(\), 203-2\0.
Cisero, C, & Royer, J. (1995). The development and cross-language transfer of phonological awareness. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 20, 275-303.
Cossu, G., Shakweiler, D., Liberman, L, Katz, L., & Tola, G.
(1988). Awareness of phonological segments and reading
ability in Italian children./l/7;7/e//')'cAo//ngu/.s//c.y, 9, 1-16.
Defior, S., Justicia, F., & Martos, F (1996). The influence of lexical
and sublexical variables in normal and poor Spanish readers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8,
487-497.

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS: CROSS-LINGUISTIC COMPARISONS WITH A FOCUS ON SPANISH

Delattre, P. (1966). A comparison of syllable length conditioning

among languages. IRAL, IV, 183-198.
Ehri, L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word
reading and its relationship to recoding. In P. Gough, L. Ehri,
& R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp.107-144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Friesen, D. C. & Jared, D. (2007). Cross-language message- and
word-level transfer effects in bilingual text processing.
Memory and Cognition, 55(7), 1542-1556.
Frost, R. (1995). Prelexcial and postlexical strategies in reading:
evidence from a deep and a shallow orthography. Journal of
Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory and Cognition,
20, 398-408.
Goswami, U. (1993). Towards an interactive model of reading development: Decoding vowel graphemes in beginning lead\t\g,. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 443-475.
Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1992). Rhyme, analogy, and children's
reading. In P.B. Gough, L.C. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.),
Reading acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Jimnez, J., & Haro, C. (1995). Effects of word
linguistic properties on phonological awareness in Spanish
cVWrm. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 193-201.
Jimnez, J., & Valle, I. (2000). Word identification and reading
disorders in the Spanish language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 44-60.
Korkeamki, R.L. (1997). What can be learned about reading acquisition on the Finnish language. In C.K. Leong & R.M.
Joshi (Eds.), Cross-language studies of learning to read and
spell (pp. 331-359). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Landerl, K. Wimmer, H., & Frith, U. (1997). The impact of orthographic consistency on dyslexia: A German-English comparison. Cognition, 63, 315-334.
Liberman, I., Liberman, A., Mattingly, I., & Shankweiler, D.
(1980). Orthography and the beginning reader. In J.F. Kavanagh & R.L. Venezky (Eds.), Orthography, reading, and
dyslexia (pp. ?-?). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Liberman, I., Shankweiler, D., Fischer, F., & Carter, B. (1974). Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 18, 201-212.
Lindgren, S., De Renzi, E., & Richman, L. (1985). Cross-national
comparisons of developmental dyslexia in Italy and the United States. Child Development, 56, 1404-1417.
Loizou, M. Si Stuart, M. (2003). Phonological awareness in monolingual and bilingual English and Greek five-year-olds. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(1), 3-18.
Lundberg, 1., Olofsson, A., & Wall, S. (1980). Reading and spelling skills in the first school years predicted from phonemic
awareness skills in kindergarten. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 21, 159-173.
Manrique, A., & Gramigna, S. (1984). La segmentacin fonolgica
y silbica en nios de preescolar y primer grado [Phonological and syllabic segmentation in preeschool and first-grade
children]. Lectura y Vida, 5, 4-14.
Merino, B. (1992). Acquisition of syntactic and phonological
features in Spanish. In H. Langdon & L. Cheng (Eds), Hispanic children and adults with communication disorders:
Assessment and Intervention (pp. 57-98). Gaithersburg, MD:
Aspen publishers.
Moris, J. (1995). Introduction: Do orthographic and phonological
peculiarities of alphabetically written languages influence
the course of literacy acquisition? Reading and Writing: An
Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 1-7.
Moris, J., Alegria, J., & Content, A. (1987). Segmental awareness: Respectable, useful, and almost always necessary. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 7, 530-556.

R. Interam. Psicol. 45(2), 2011

Nslund, J., Schneider, W., & van den Broek, P. (1997). Beginning
reading in Germany and the U.S.: A comparison of phonological segmentation, decoding, lexical access, and comprehension. In C.K. Leong & R.M. Joshi (Eds.), Cross-language
studies of learning to read and spell (pp. 103-120). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Nation, A., & Hulme, C. (1997). Phonemic segmentation, not
onset-rime segmentation, predicts early reading and spelling
skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 154-167.
Perfetti, C. (1994). Some reflections on learning and not learning
to read. Remedial and Special Education, 5(3), 34-38.
Perfetti, C. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In P. Gough, L., Ehri, and R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading
acquisition (pp. 145-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Pugh, K. (2006). A neurocognitive overview of reading acquisition and dyslexia across languages. Developmental Science,
9(5), 448-450.
Quiroga, T., Lemos-Britton, Z., Mostafapour, E., Abbott, R. D.,
& Berninger, V W. (2002). Phonological awareness and beginning in reading in Spanish-speaking ESL first graders:
Research into practice. Journal of School Psychology, 40(1),
85-111.
Scarborough, H. S. (2005). Developmental relationships between
language and reading: Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis
with some ugly facts. In H. W. Catts & A. G. Kamhi (Eds.),
The connections between language and reading disabilities
(pp.3-24) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Seymour, P. H. K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation
literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143-174.
Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete
science-based program for reading problems of any level.
New York: Knopf
Snowling, M. J. (2006). Language skills and learning to read: The
dyslexia spectrum. In M. J. Snowling & J. Stackhouse (Eds.),
Dyslexia, speech and language: A practitioner's handbook
(2nd ed., pp. 1-14). Chichester, West Sussex: Whurr Publishers.
Stahl, S., & Murray, B. (1994). Defining phonological awareness
and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 86, llX-liii.
Stahl, S., & Murray, B. (1998). Issues involved in defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. In J.
Metsala & L. Ehri (Eds.), Word Recognition and Beginning
Literacy. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Stanovich, K. (1981). Relationships between word decoding speed,
general name-retrieval ability, and reading progress as predictors of first grade academic achievement. Psychology in
the Schools, /2, 4-11.
Stanovich, K. (1987). Introduction. Merill-Palmer Quarterly, 33,
7-10.
Stanovich, K.E., Cunningham, A.E., & Cramer, B. (1984). Assessing phonological awareness in kindergarten children: Issues
of task comparability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 175-190.
Treiman, R., & Weatherston, S. (1992). Effects of linguistic
structure on children's ability to isolate initial consonants.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 174-181.
Uhry, J. K., & Clark, D. B. (2004). Dyslexia: Theory and practice
of instruction (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Venezky, R.L. (1970). The Structure of English Orthography The
Hague: Mouton.
Wagner, R., & Torgesen, J. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills.
Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192-212.

Revista Interamericana de Psicologa/Interamerican Journal of Psychology - 2011, Vol. 45, Num. 2, pp. 263-270

270
(yj
O
^
Q
fZ
C
*^

Wagner, R., & Torgesen, J., & Rashotte, C. (1994). Development of

reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73-87.
Wentink, H., van Bon, W., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Reading development in elementary school: Do syllables play a role in
phonological decoding? In C.K. Leong & R.M. Joshi (Eds.),
Cross-language studies of learning to read and spell (pp.
195-212). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Wimmer, H., & Goswami, U. (1994). The influence of orthographic consistency on reading development: Word recognition in
English and German children. Cognition, 51, 91-103.
Ziegler, J. C , & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A
psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin,
131, 3-29.

Received 02/03/2011
Accepted 22/06/2011

Amanda Clinton. University of Puerto Rico,

Mayaguez, Puerto Rico
Maria Quiones. University of Puerto Rico,
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico
Catherine Christo. California State University,
Sacramento

R.Interam.Psicol. 45(2), 2011

Copyright of Revista Interamericana de Psicologa is the property of Sociedad Interamericana de Psicologia and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.