The nature of a writing system shapes the cognitive and neural mechanisms for reading acquisition
Rattachement africain : kr, gb, de, mx. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Writing systems are cultural inventions that differ in how they represent spoken language. We tested how the brain learns to map arbitrary visual symbols to sound and meaning by comparing neural activity for artificial writing systems that were either alphabetic (systematic symbol-sound mappings) or logographic (arbitrary symbol-sound mappings). Twenty-four adults learned to read aloud and comprehend novel words written in each system. After 2 weeks of training, functional magnetic resonance imaging during reading comprehension revealed that the dorsal pathway (inferior parietal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-sound, was more active for the alphabetic system, whereas the ventral pathway (anterior fusiform gyrus, middle temporal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-meaning, was more active for the logographic system. Combined with performance differences, these findings indicate that systematic symbol-sound mappings allowed the brain to bridge the interface between vision and meaning via sound, whereas an absence of systematicity made it more efficient to link vision directly to meaning. Thus, the same brain finds different solutions to the problem of reading that capitalise on the statistical properties of culturally invented writing systems.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The nature of a writing system shapes the cognitive and neural mechanisms for reading acquisition
- Date Crossref
- 07/04/2025
- Éditeur
- Center for Open Science
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.