Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:36:57.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theoretical Perspectives on Reading

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2010

Thom Hudson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Reading text is a relatively recent human activity, only having been around for about 5,000 years. Through text, writers are able to communicate with others at great distances. Readers are able to perceive arbitrarily determined shapes presented against some background and then form them into meaning. As the reader becomes more proficient at reading and uses reading in more and different ways, this process of interpreting letters and words becomes increasingly automatic.

Type
Theoretical Perspectives on the Four Language Skills
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 18 , March 1998 , pp. 43 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, R. C, and Pearson, P. D.. 1984. A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In Pearson, P. D., Barr, R., Kamil, M. L. and Mosenthal, P.Handbook of reading research. New York: Longman. 255–292.Google Scholar
Barnett, M. A. 1989. More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.Google Scholar
Beck, I. L. and Carpenter, P. A.. 1986. Cognitive approaches to understanding reading: Implications for instructional practice. American Psychologist. 41.1098–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloome, D. 1993. Necessary indeterminancy and the microethnographic study of reading as a social process. Journal of Research in Reading. 16.98–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, D., Snow, M. A. and , M. B.Content-based second language instruction. New York: Newbury House.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
carr, T. H. 1982. What's in a model: Reading theory and reading instruction. In Singer, M. (ed.) Competent reader, disabled reader: Research and application. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum. 119–140.Google Scholar
Carrell, P. L. 1983. Three components of background knowledge in reading comprehension. Language Learning. 33.183–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B. 1964. Language and thought. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Carson, J. G. 1993. Reading for writing: Cognitive perspectives. In Carson, J. G. and Leki, I. (eds.) Reading in the composition classroom. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. 85–104.Google Scholar
Crandall, J. 1993. Content-centered learning in the United States. In Grabe, W., et al. (eds.) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13. Issues in second language teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. 111–126.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C. 1995. Phases of development in learning to read words by sight. Journal of Research in Reading. 19.116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskey, D. and Grabe, W.. 1988. Interactive models for second language reading: Perspectives on instruction. In Carrell, P., Devine, J. and Eskey, D. (eds.) Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferdman, B. M. and Weber, R-M.. 1994. Introduction. In Ferdman, B. M., Weber, R-M. and Ramirez, A. G. (eds.) Literacy across languages and cultures. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 3–29.Google Scholar
Gibson, E. J. and Levin., H. 1975. The psychology of reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, R. 1985. Foreword. In Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A. and Wilkinson, I. A.. Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. S. 1968. The psycholinguistic nature of the reading process. In Goodman, K. S., (ed.) The psycholinguistic nature of the reading process. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. 15–26.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. S. 1976. Behind the eye: What happens in reading. In Singer, H. and Ruddell, R. B. (eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 470–508.Google Scholar
Gough, P. B. 1972. One second of reading. In Kavanaugh, F. and Mattingly, I. G. (eds.) Language by ear and by eye: The relationship between speech and reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 331–358.Google Scholar
Gough, P. B. 1995. The new literacy: Caveat emptor. Journal of Research in Reading. 18.79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, W. 1991. Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly. 25.375–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, S. B. 1983. Ways with words. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, W. A. and Tunmer, W. E.. 1993. The components of reading. In Thompson, G. B., Tunmer, W. E. and Nicholson, T. (eds.) Reading acquisition processes. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. 1–19.Google Scholar
Hudson, T. 1982. The effect of induced schemata on the “Short Circuit” in L2 reading: Non-decoding factors in L2 reading performance. Language Learning. 32.1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, T. 1991. A content comprehension approach to reading English for science and technology. TESOL Quarterly. 25.77–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A. and Carpenter, P. A.. 1980. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review. 87.329–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, J. R. 1993. Genre and literacy—modeling context in educational linguistics. In Grabe, W., et al. (eds.) Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13. Issues in second language teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. 141–172.Google Scholar
Maybin, J. and Moss, G.. 1993. Talk about texts: Reading as a social event. Journal of Research in Reading. 16.138–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConkie, G. W. and Rayner, K.. 1975. The span of the effective stimulus during a fixation in reading. Perception and Psychophysics. 17.578–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, K. 1994. The culture of reading and the teaching of English. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Meara, P. 1996. The dimensions of lexical competence. In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K. and Williams, J. (eds.) Performance and competence in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press. 35–53.Google Scholar
Nicholson, T. 1993. The case against context. In Thompson, G. B., Tunmer, W. E. and Nicholson, T. (eds.) Reading acquisition processes. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. 91–104.Google Scholar
Parry, K. 1993. The social construction of reading strategies: New directions for research. Journal of Research in Reading. 16.148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, P. D. and Tierney, R. J.. 1984. On becoming a thoughtful reader: Learning to read like a writer. In Purves, A. and Niles, O. (eds.) Becoming a reader in a complex society. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 144–173.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. 1995. Cognitive research can inform reading education. Journal of Research in Reading. 18.106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. 1978. Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin. 85.618–660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A.. 1989. The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarPubMed
Reder, S. 1994. Practice-engagement theory: A sociocultural approach to literacy across languages and cultures. In Ferdman, B. M., Weber, R-M. and Ramírez, A. G. (eds.) Literacy across languages and cultures. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 33–74.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E. 1977. Toward an interactive model of reading. In Dornič, S. (ed.) Attention and performance VI. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum. 573–603.Google Scholar
Samuels, S. J. and Kamil, M. L.. 1984. Models of the reading process. In Pearson, P. D., Barr, R., Kamil, M. and Mosenthal, P. (eds.) Handbook of reading research. New York: Longman. 185–224.Google Scholar
Scott, J. A., Hiebert, E. H., and Anderson, R. C.. 1994. Research as we approach the millennium: Beyond Becoming a nation of readers. In Lehr, F. and Osborn, J. (eds.) Reading, language and literacy. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, F. 1971. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Smith, F. 1988a. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read, 4th ed. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, F. 1988b. Joining the literacy club. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
Spivey, N. 1990. Transforming texts: Constructive processes in reading and writing. Written Communication. 7.256–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. 1980. Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly. 16.32–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. and Stanovich, P. J.. 1995. How research might inform the debate about early reading acquisition. Journal of Research in Reading. 18.87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stierer, B. 1993. Review article. Journal of Research in Reading. 16.159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Street, B. V. 1993. The new literacy studies. Journal of Research in Reading. 16.81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, S. E. 1962. An evaluation of forty-one trainees who had recently completed the “reading dynamics” program. Eleventh yearbook of the national reading conference. Chicago: National Reading Conference. 41–55.Google Scholar