Este trabajo exploratorio estudia la programación del trazo que realizan los niños durante el aprendizaje de la escritura en catalán. Para ello, veintiún niños y niñas de 1° de Primaria de una escuela de Cornellá (Barcelona), copiaron palabras de siete letras, bisílabas y trisílabas, sobre una tableta digitalizadora que permite registrar información sobre el movimiento y la presión ejercidos al escribir. El análisis de la duración de los movimientos realizados por los niños nos permite obtener información sobre su programación. Los resultados muestran diferencias significativas en el trazado de ambos tipos de palabras, indicando que los participantes programan la escritura en función de la estructura silábica de las palabras que escriben. Estos resultados se comparan con los obtenidos en otras lenguas en investigaciones anteriores.
References
1.
BadiaM. (2002). Introducció a la fonètica i a la fonologia catalanes.Barcelona: Publicacions de l'Abadia de Montserrat.
2.
BogaertsH.MeulenbroekR. G. J.ThomassenA. J. W. M. (1996). The possible role of the syllable as a processing unit in handwriting. En SimnerM. L.LeedhamC. G.ThomassenA. J. W. M. (Eds.), Handwriting and drawing research: Basic and applied issues (pp. 115–126). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
3.
CaramazzaA.MiceliG. (1990). The structure of graphemic representations.Cognition, 37, 243–297.
4.
DellG. S. (1986). A spreading-activation model of retrieval in sentence production.Psychological Review, 93, 283–321.
5.
GoswamiU.ZieglerJ. C.DaltonL.SchneiderW. (2001). Pseudohomophone effects and phonological recoding procedures in reading development in English and German.Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 648–664.
6.
KandelS.álvarezC. J.ValleeN. (2006). Syllables as processing units in handwriting production.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32 (1), 18–31.
7.
KandelS.SolerO.ValdoisS.GrosC. (2006). Graphemes as motor units in the acquisition of writing skills.Reading and Writing, 19 (3), 313–337.
8.
KandelS.ValdoisS. (2006a). Syllables as functional units in a copying task.Language and Cognitive Processes, 21 (4), 432–452.
9.
KandelS.ValdoisS. (2006b). French and spanish-speaking children use different visual and motor units during spelling acquisition.Language and Cognitive Processes, 21 (5), 531–561.
10.
LeveltW. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation.Boston, MA: MIT Press.
11.
LeveltW. J. M. (1993). Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representations.Cognition, 42, 1–22.
12.
LeveltW. J. M.RoelofsA.MeyerA. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production.Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38.
13.
MeulenbroekR. G. J.Van GalenG. P. (1988). The acquisition of skilled handwriting: Discontinuous trends in kinematic variables. En ColleyA. M.BeechJ. R. (Eds.), Cognition and action in skilled behaviour (pp. 273–281). Oxford, UK: North-Holland.
14.
MeulenbroekR. G. J.Van GalenG. P. (1990). Perceptual-motor complexity of printed and cursive letters.Journal of Experimental Education, 58 (2), 95–110.
15.
RabinerL. R.GoldB. (1975). Theory and application of digital signal processing.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
16.
RafelJ. (Ed.) (1996). Diccionari de freqüències.Barcelona: Institut d'Estudis Catalans.
17.
Sebastián-gallesN.DupouxE.SeguíJ.MehlerJ. (1992). Contrasting syllabic effects in catalan and spanish.Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 18–32.
18.
ShareD. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition.Cognition, 55, 151–218.
19.
ShareD. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the selfteaching hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 95–129.
20.
TeulingsH. L.ThomassenA. J. W. M.Van GalenG. P. (1983). Preparation of partly precued handwriting movements: The size of movement units in writing.Acta Psychologica, 54, 165–177.
21.
TolchinskyL.SimóA. (2001). Escribir y leer a través del curriculum.Barcelona: ICE- Horsori.
22.
Van GalenG. P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory.Human Movement Science, 10, 165–191.
23.
Van GalenG. P.SmythM. M.MeulenbroekR. G. J.HylkemaH. (1989). The role of short-term memory and the motor buffer in handwriting under visual and non-visual guidance. En PlamondonR.SuenC. Y.SimnerM. L. (Eds.), Computer recognition and human production of handwriting (pp. 253–271). Singapur: World Scientific.
24.
WingA. M.BaddeleyA. D. (1980). Spelling errors in handwriting: A corpus and a distributional analysis. En FrithU. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 251–285) Academic Press.
25.
ZesigerP.MounoudP.HauertC. A. (1993). Effects of lexicality and trigram frequency on handwriting production in children and adults.Acta Psychologica, 82, 353–365.
26.
ZieglerJ. C.GoswamiU. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory.Psychological Bulletin, 131, 3–29.
27.
ZieglerJ. C.PerryC.JacobsA. M.BraunM. (2001). The DRC model of visual word recognition and reading aloud: An extension to German.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12, 413–430.
