Search

It is widely acknowledged that opaque orthographies place additional demands on learning, often requiring many years to fully acquire. It is less widely recognized, however, that such opacity may offer certain benefits in the context of reading. For example, heterographic homophones such as ⟨knight⟩ and ⟨night⟩ (words that sound the same but which are spelled differently) impose additional costs in learning but reduce ambiguity in reading. Here, we consider the possibility that-left to evolve freely-writing systems will sometimes choose to forego some simplicity for the sake of informativeness when there is functional pressure to do so. We investigate this hypothesis by simulating the evolution of orthography as it is transmitted from one generation to the next, both with and without a communicative pressure for ambiguity avoidance. In addition, we consider two mechanisms by which informative heterography might be selected for: differentiation, in which new spellings are created to differentiate meaning (e.g., ⟨lite⟩ vs. ⟨light⟩), and conservation, in which heterography arises as a byproduct of sound change (e.g., ⟨meat⟩ vs. ⟨meet⟩). Under pressure from learning alone, orthographic systems become transparent, but when combined with communicative pressure, they tend to favor some additional informativeness. Nevertheless, our findings also suggest that, in the long term, simpler, transparent spellings may be preferred in the absence of top-down explicit teaching., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Skilled readers are typically most accurate at identifying words when fixating them slightly left of the central character, the so-called optimal viewing position. There are two main explanations for this effect, which are not mutually exclusive. The first claims that the optimal viewing position lies left-of-center due to the particular constraints of the human perceptual system. The second explains the effect in terms of the beginnings of words generally being more informative about word identity. The complexities of natural languages make it difficult to tease apart the relative contribution of each explanation. We explore this issue through the lens of a Bayesian cognitive model and two experiments using artificial lexicons in which we can carefully control how information is distributed across wordforms. Our results replicate previous findings and further suggest that readers may use implicit knowledge about information distribution to minimize uncertainty when targeting words.

• Different languages concentrate information in different areas of the word. • We hypothesize that readers target words optimally to maximize information uptake. • We test this hypothesis with artificially constructed lexicons and eye tracking. • We support our analyses with a Bayesian cognitive model of visual word recognition. • Our findings suggest lexicon-level information might play a role in natural reading. Skilled readers use multiple heuristics to guide their eye movements during reading. One possible cue that readers may rely on is the way in which information about word identity is typically spread across words. In many (but not all) languages, words are, on average, more informative on the left, predicting that readers should have a preference for left-of-center fixation when targeting words. Any such effect will, however, be modulated by important perceptual constraints and may be masked by various confounding factors. In three experiments with artificially constructed lexicons, we provide causal evidence that the way in which a language distributes information affects how readers land on words. We further support our analyses with a Bayesian cognitive model of visual word recognition that predicts where readers ought to fixate in order to minimize uncertainty about word identity. Taken together, our findings suggest that global properties of the lexicon may play a role in isolated word targeting, and may therefore make a contribution to eye movement behavior in more natural reading settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]