1. Word Concept of Illiterates and Low- literates: Worlds Apart? Liesbeth Onderdelinden epm.onderdelinden@inter.nl.net Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands Sponsored by SNUF (Nijmegen University Fund)

2. Word concept Awareness of the word as a linguistic unit demonstrated by the ability to isolate words in a stream of spoken language Tests:- sentence segmentation e.g. Where is mother? - listen to a story and repeat the last word when the narrator pauses e.g. There is not enough food … anymore.

3. Results of previous research among children Developmental progression (Karpova; Papandropoulou & Sinclair; Downing & Oliver; Fox & Routh; Edwards & Kirkpatrick) Children under 7 generally no clear word concept (Karpova; Holden & MacGinitie; Downing & Oliver; Ehri; Edwards & Kirkpatrick) Increase in metalinguistic knowledge around 7 or 8 years (Papandropoulou & Sinclair; Edwards & Kirkpatrick) Open class words (e.g. nouns and verbs) were better recognized as individual words than closed class words (e.g. prepositions and articles) (Papandropoulou & Sinclair; Ehri; Holden & MacGinitie)

4. Two studies among 4- and 5-year-old children compared Karmiloff-Smith et al. (1996) introduced an on-line task Results: -4-year-olds scored 75.3 % correct -5-year-olds scored 96.2 % correct Conclusion: even young children of 4 and 5 years old are able to isolate words in a meaningful context This study was replicated by Kurvers & Uri (2006) Results: -4-year olds scored 26.6% correct -5-year-olds scored 26.6% correct Conclusion: literacy may play a role in the development of a child’s word concept

5. Hypotheses of the present study Low-literates perform better than illiterates Open class words (e.g. nouns and verbs) are better recognized than closed class words (e.g. articles and prepositions)

6. Participants: 30 adult L2 learners 15 illiterates: No education in native country Not able to read and write Speaking skills at least A1 (CEF) 15 low-literates : No education in native country Became literate in NL Speaking skills at least A1 (CEF) Approx. 2 years DL2 education in NL

7. Language background –L1: different languages, but mostly: »Moroccan Arabic (6) »Berber (7) »Somali (8) –L2: Dutch

8. Instruments  Reading task: –illiterates: a few easy words –low-literates: a small text about which two questions were asked  Word awareness task: listen to a story and repeat the last word when the narrator paused 32 target words: 16 open class words (e.g. verbs, nouns and adjectives) 16 closed class words (e.g. articles and prepositions)

9. Procedure word awareness task A short practice story with 6 open class target words: –no explanation of what a word is –feedback on an incorrect answer –no explanatory details This task was administered to 14 illiterates and 15 low- literates

10. Berber folk story about a man and his seven daughters One day his new … wife said: ‘There is not enough food … any more.’ Then she told everything … to her son.

11. % correct by group and word class Word classGroupMean (sd)% correct OpenIlliterates8.79 (4.64) 54.9 Low-literates12.4 (4.63) 77.5 ClosedIlliterates6.00 (3.40) 37.5 Low-literates8.93 (3.90) 55.8

12. Test difference between both groups Grouptdfp Illiterates / Low-literates-2.208270.018

13. % correct by group and word type

14. Comparison of word types tdfp Open/closed class 6.869280.000 Mono- / disyllabic -5.188280.000

15. Answer categories (1) : Correct answer: e.g. nieuwe (new) in the sentence: “Op een dag zei zijn nieuwe …” (One day his new …”) Incorrect: Multiword answer: e.g. niet genoeg eten not enough food Anticipation: e.g. vrouw instead of nieuwe wife instead of new in the sentence: “Op een dag zei zijn nieuwe …” “One day said his new …” Single syllable: e.g. leen (instead of alleen) lone (instead of alone)

16. Answer categories (2): Elision (resyllabification): adding the last consonant of the preceding word to the target word e.g. in the sentence: Hij nam ook… giving “mook” as target word instead of “ook” He took also… Non-target single word: e.g. genoeg instead of hout enough instead of wood in the sentence: “Toen ze genoeg hout…” “When they enough wood...” No response: I don’t know

17. Error types GroupMultiwordAnticipationNon-target single word Else Dutch (Onderdelinden) Illiterates41.54.75.12.5 Low- literates 24.41.75.02.3 Dutch (Kurvers) 4-year52.015.42.05.9 5-year54.812.11.56.5 Norwegian (Uri) 4-year46.315.13.76.0 5-year50.912.53.14.6 English (Karmiloff) 4-year17.52.92.30.8 5-year0.80.01.02.1

18. StudyWord ClassGroup% Correct Netherlands (Onderdelinden) Open Closed Illiterates 54.9 37.5 Netherlands (Kurvers, 2006) Open Closed 4-/5-year olds 4-/5-year olds 24.4 25.5 Norway (Uri, 2006) Open Closed 4-/5-year olds 29.4 27.1 England (Karmiloff-Smith et al., 1996) Open Closed 4-/5-year olds 87.0 84.5

19. Comparison Karmiloff-Smith et al. and Kurvers & Uri The illiterates were not nearly as good as the English children The illiterates performed better than the 4- and 5-year-old Dutch and Norwegian children

20. Possible reason for gap in performance between English children and adult L2 learners (Lower) middle class background of the children and hence their familiarity with printed materials

21. Reasons for difference between the Dutch and Norwegian children and the illiterates –the illiterates are proficient L1 speakers –the illiterates had learnt an L2 –the illiterates participated in an L2 course and were therefore probably more focused on language –maybe the teacher had just discussed one or more of the target words (hence better recognized)

22. Comparison with Karmiloff et al. and Kurvers & Uri as to open and closed class words Present study shows significant difference in performance on open and closed class words (open class words were better isolated) Possible reasons: L2 learners first focus on open class words Ceiling effect among English children Poor performance of Dutch and Norw. children

23. Conclusions On all categories low-literates perform significantly better than illiterates Two years of literacy education cause an increase in performance of 20% Literacy is an important stimulating factor in the development of word awareness

24. References Karmiloff-Smith, A., Grant, J., Sims, K., Jones, M. & Cuckle, P. (1996). Rethinking metalinguistic awareness: representing and accessing knowledge about what counts as a word. Cognition, 58, 197-219. Kurvers, J. & Uri, H. (2006) Metalexical Awareness: Development, Methodology or Written Language? A Cross-linguistic Comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 4, 353-367.