Lexical and sublexical translation of spelling to sound: Strategic anticipation of lexical status.

TLDR

Two experiments examined oral reading of single words by comparing naming performance in pure blocks of nonwords or exception words with performance in mixed blocks of randomly interleaved nonwords and exception words. Participants named exception words faster and made fewer regularization errors when nonwords were not anticipated, suggesting they inhibit assembled phonology in that context, while nonwords were named faster (but not more accurately) when low‑frequency exception words were not expected, indicating that readiness to retrieve learned pronunciations is modulated by anticipated lexical status.

Abstract

Two experiments on oral reading of single words compared naming performance in pure blocks of nonwords or exception words with performance in blocks of randomly mixed nonwords and exception words. Ss named exception words faster and made fewer regularization errors when they were not also prepared for nonwords. These data suggest Ss inhibit or ignore the computation of assembled phonology when only exception words are expected. Ss named nonwords faster, but no more accurately, when low-frequency exception words were not also anticipated. Thus, Ss' readiness to execute assembled phonology appears to be adjusted in relation to the likely time course of retrieval of learned pronunciations, when the latter must be attended to