We introduce a model of Hebrew reading development that emphasizes both the universal and script-specific aspects of learning to read a Semitic abjad. At the universal level, the study of Hebrew reading acquisition offers valuable insights into the fundamental dilemmas of all writing systems—balancing the competing needs of the novice versus the expert reader (Share, 2008). At the script-specific level, pointed Hebrew initially employs supplementary vowel signs, providing the beginning reader a consistent, phonologically well-specified script while helping the expert-to-be unitize words and morphemes via (consonantal) spelling constancy. A major challenge for the developing Hebrew reader is negotiating the transition from pointed to unpointed Hebrew, with its abundance of homographs. Our triplex model emphasizes three phases of early Hebrew reading development: a progression from lower-order, phonological (sublexical) sequential spelling-to-sound translation (Phase 1, Grade 1) to higher-order, string-level (lexical) lexico-morpho-orthographic processing (Phase 2, Grade 2) followed, in the upper elementary grades, by a supralexical contextual level (Phase 3) essential for dealing with the pervasive homography of unpointed Hebrew.
AllonE. (1988). The nikud and early Hebrew reading. [In Hebrew.]Be’eri, 1, 143–149.
2.
Bar-KochvaI. (2013). What are the underlying skills of silent reading acquisition? A developmental study from kindergarten to the 2nd grade. Reading and Writing, 26, 1417–1436.
3.
Bar-KochvaI.BreznitzZ. (2014). Reading scripts that differ in orthographic transparency: A within-participant-and-language investigation of underlying skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 121, 12–27.
4.
Bar-OnA. (2015). kriya betzel hahomografia: haba’aya hi gam hapitaron [Reading in the shadow of homography: The problem is the solution]. Safa Ve’Oriyanut, 5, 99–120.
5.
Bar-OnA.DatnerE.RavidD. (2017). Context effect on resolving heterophonic-homography in learning to read Hebrew. Reading and Writing, 30, 463–487.
6.
Bar-OnA.RavidD. (2011). Morphological analysis in learning to read pseudowords in Hebrew. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 553–581.
7.
BendavidA. (1971). Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew. [In Hebrew.] Tel Aviv, Israel: Dvir.
8.
Ben-DrorI.BentinS.FrostR. (1995). Semantic, phonologic, and morphologic skills in reading disabled and normal children: Evidence from perception and production of spoken Hebrew. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 876–893.
9.
BentinS.DeutschA.LibermanI. Y. (1990). Syntactic competence and reading ability in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 147–172.
10.
BenuckM. B.PeverlyS. T. (2004). The effect of orthographic depth on reliance upon semantic context for oral reading in English and Hebrew. Journal of Research in Reading, 27, 281–299.
11.
BoothJ. R.HarasakiY.BurmanD. D. (2006). Development of lexical and sentence level context effects for dominant and subordinate word meanings of homonyms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 531–554.
12.
Cohen-MimranR. (2009). The contribution of language skills to reading fluency: A comparison of two orthographies for Hebrew. Journal of Child Language, 36, 657–672.
13.
ComrieB. (Ed.). (2009). The world’s major languages (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
14.
DiringerD. (1968). The alphabet: A key to the history of mankind (3rd ed., Vols. 1–2). New York, NY: Funk & Wagnalls.
15.
EvansN.LevinsonS. C. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 429–492.
16.
FrostR. (2012). Towards a universal model of reading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 263–279.
17.
FrostR.KatzL.BentinS. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104–115.
18.
GurT. (2005). Reading Hebrew vowel diacritics: A longitudinal investigation from Grade 1 to Grade 3 (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.
19.
HenrichJ.HeineS. J.NorenzayanA. (2010). The weirdest people in the world?Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135.
20.
KhannaaM. M.BolandJ. E. (2010). Children’s use of language context in lexical ambiguity resolution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(1), 160–193.
21.
KoriatA. (1985). Lexical access for low and high frequency words in Hebrew. Memory & Cognition, 13, 37–44.
22.
McCarthyJ. J. (1981). A prosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 373–418.
23.
NavonD.ShimronJ. (1985). Source and function of phonological codes in processing written Hebrew: Final report to the US-Israeli Binational Science Foundation. Haifa, Israel: University of Haifa.
24.
PerfettiC. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In GoughP. B.EhriL. C.TreimanR. (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
RavidD. (1996). Accessing the mental lexicon: Evidence from incompatibility between representation of spoken and written morphology. Linguistics, 34, 1219–1246.
26.
RavidD. (2006). Hebrew orthography and literacy. In JoshiR. M.AaronP. G. (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 339–365). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
RavidD. (2012). Spelling morphology. New York, NY: Springer.
28.
Saiegh-HaddadE. (2007). Epilinguistic and metalinguistic phonological awareness may be subject to different constraints: Evidence from Hebrew. First Language, 27, 385–405.
29.
Saiegh-HaddadE.Henkin-RoitfarbR. (2014). The structure of Arabic language and orthography. In Saiegh-HaddadE.JoshiM. (Eds.), Handbook of Arabic literacy (pp. 3–28). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
30.
SchiffR.KatzirT.ShoshanN. (2013). Reading accuracy and speed of vowelized and unvowelized scripts among dyslexic readers of Hebrew: The road not taken. Annals of Dyslexia, 63, 171–185.
31.
SchwarzwaldO. R. (2001). Modern Hebrew. Languages of the world / Materials 127. Munich, Germany: Lincom Europa.
32.
SeymourP. H. K.AroM.ErskineJ. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174.
33.
ShanyM.Bar-OnA.KatzirT. (2012). Reading different orthographic structures in the shallow-pointed Hebrew script: A cross-grade study in elementary school. Reading and Writing, 25, 1217–1238.
34.
ShareD. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.
35.
ShareD. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 95–129.
36.
ShareD. L. (2004). Orthographic learning at a glance: On the time course and developmental onset of self-teaching. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87, 267–298.
37.
ShareD. L. (2008). On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: The perils of over-reliance on an outlier orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 584–616.
38.
ShareD. (in press-a). Laying the foundations for a universal model of learning to read. In Bar-OnA.RavidD. (Eds.), Handbook of communication disorders: Theoretical, empirical, and applied linguistics perspectives. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
39.
ShareD. L. (in press-b). Learning to read Hebrew. In VerhoevenL.PerfettiC. A. (Eds.), Reading acquisition: Cross-linguistic and cross-script perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
ShareD. L.BlumP. (2005). Syllable splitting among literate and pre-literate Hebrew-speakers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 182–202.
41.
ShareD. L.DanielsP. T. (2015). Aksharas, alphasyllabaries, abugidas, alphabets and orthographic depth: Reflections on Rimzhim, Katz and Fowler (2014), Writing Systems Research. doi:10.1080/17586801.2015.1016395
42.
ShareD. L.LevinI. (1999). Learning to read and write in Hebrew. In HarrisM.HatanoG. (Eds.), Learning to read and write (pp. 89–111). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43.
ShareD. L.ShalevC. (2004). Self-teaching in normal and disabled readers. Reading and Writing, 17, 1–31.
44.
ShatilE.ShareD. L. (2003). Cognitive antecedents of early reading ability: A test of the modularity hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86, 1–31.
45.
ShimronJ.SivanT. (1994). Reading proficiency and orthography: Evidence from Hebrew and English. Language Learning, 44, 5–27.
46.
StanovichK. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.
47.
StanovichK. E. (1990). Concepts in developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental Review, 10, 72–100.
48.
StanovichK. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
49.
StanovichK. E.WestR. F. (1979). Mechanisms of sentence context effects in reading: Automatic activation and conscious attention. Memory and Cognition, 7, 77–85.
50.
TolchinskyL.LevinI.AramD.McBride-ChangC. (2012). Building literacy in alphabetic, abjad and morphosyllabic systems. Reading and Writing, 25, 1573–1598.
51.
TolchinskyL.TeberoskyA. (1998). The development of word segmentation and writing in two scripts. Cognitive Development, 13, 1–14.
