PRESENTS a theoretical argument that reading must be considered a psycholinguistic process. In discussion of this process, the reader is viewed as a user of language who processes three kinds of information, grapho-phonic, syntactic, and semantic, as he reacts to the graphic display on the page. In comparing unexpected responses in oral reading to expected responses, the phycholinguistic reading process is revealed. A taxonomy of cues and miscues in reading is presented for the depth analysis of oral reading phenomena. This taxonomy has been developed in close relationship to the theory and has been perfected in use in a continuing series of depth studies of oral reading.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kenneth S. Goodman (1969) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: