ライフサイエンスコーパス: orthographic

1 conditional random fields with a variety of orthographic and contextual features.

2 PB has been demonstrated for orthographic and phonological but not for semantically r

3 separately may affect the ability to extract orthographic and phonological information during reading

4 the results suggest that the integration of orthographic and phonological processing is directly rel

5 hat at early stages of word recognition, the orthographic and phonological processing is similar for

6 rietal lobule is involved in mapping between orthographic and phonological representations.

7 was examined to test the hypothesis that the orthographic and phonological skills engaged in visual w

8 the left prefrontal cortex as a function of orthographic and semantic dimensions, suggesting that it

9 rresponded, respectively, to main effects of orthographic and semantic overlap.

10 ed almost entirely with regions sensitive to orthographic and semantic relatedness, our results sugge

11 rporated in the VLSM analysis to control for orthographic and working memory demands of the rhyming t

12 reading by modulating semantic, lexical, and orthographic attributes of letter strings.

13 tered at JA04 (chi2=9.48; empirical P=.0033; orthographic choice), and there was strong evidence for

14 on at this same marker (chi2=11.49; P=.0007; orthographic choice).

15 notypes was 0.27, with a maximum of 0.66 for orthographic choice.

16 in what has been described as "cracking the orthographic code." Although the challenge to develop mo

17 guages complicates the task of "cracking the orthographic code." Frost suggests that orthographic pro

18 of word recognition and component skills of orthographic coding, phonological decoding, and phoneme

19 everal languages, based on a revised role of orthographic coding.

20 seen there during phonological, than during orthographic, decision making, with the activation durin

21 ly for reading, is therefore not specific to orthographic decoding but may reflect a more general imp

22 We examined the effects of morpho-orthographic decomposition on complex word processing us

23 The process of morpho-orthographic decomposition was primed by the prior prese

24 resent exhibit systematic trade-offs between orthographic depth and morphological complexity.

25 ed in words and nonwords, suggesting similar orthographic encoding in the two groups.

26 are merely one aspect of investigations into orthographic encoding, while open bigrams can accommodat

27 similar endings than to those with identical orthographic endings; jazz-has vs. cat-hat).

28 hology should be incorporated besides purely orthographic features in modeling word recognition.

29 ted with standardized behavioral measures of orthographic fluency and single word reading.

30 Results suggest that orthographic fluency is reflected in both lower-level, s

31 ty is thought to determine the grain size of orthographic information extracted whilst encoding lette

32 aque and a transparent orthographies encoded orthographic information presented to the right of fixat

33 be driven by the strength of engagement with orthographic information.

34 model of reading necessitates "cracking" the orthographic input code.

35 Orthographic knowledge gained through spelling affects r

36 e ability to visually recognize words (i.e., orthographic knowledge).

37 dren's reading and spelling errors show that orthographic learning involves complex interactions with

38 in left occipitotemporal cortex contains an orthographic lexicon based on neuronal representations h

39 tation coding for whole real words (i.e., an orthographic lexicon), but experimental support for such

40 yond letter-position encoding and beyond the orthographic lexicon.

41 a distance of at least 5 cM for deficits in orthographic (LOD = 3.10) and phonological (LOD = 2.42)

42 dence of substrates that selectively support orthographic long-term and working memory processes, wit

43 wn that brain lesions may selectively affect orthographic long-term memory and working memory process

44 long-term and working memory processes, with orthographic long-term memory deficits centred in either

45 uffering from deficits only affecting either orthographic long-term or working memory, as well as six

46 group differences in the N1 range, such that orthographic modulations observed in controls were absen

47 ic Easy-Access Resource for Phonological and Orthographic Neighborhood Densities), a centralized data

48 First, the effect of orthographic neighborhood density can be extended beyond

49 , a centralized database of phonological and orthographic neighborhood information, both within and b

50 mpare general properties of phonological and orthographic neighborhoods across languages.

51 ords that differed in terms of the number of orthographic neighbors (many or few) they had in the oth

52 or list of words and obtain phonological and orthographic neighbors, neighborhood densities, mean nei

53 me difficulty in processing phonological and orthographic number words, all basic computational proce

54 g research agenda, and that strong claims of orthographic "optimality" are unwarranted.

55 ch writing systems have evolved to represent orthographic, phonological, and semantic information in

56 ical priming transpired as interactions with orthographic priming (in P2, N2 and P3 ranges).

57 logical analysis to examine phonological and orthographic priming, respectively.

58 We suggest that the same basic orthographic processes are applied to all languages.

59 rward views of word reading and suggest that orthographic processes are modulated by prefrontal and s

60 nstructing a model of word recognition where orthographic processes operate in isolation.

61 Measures related to phonological and orthographic processing also showed linkage at this locu

62 I have argued that orthographic processing cannot be understood and modeled

63 reas increased activity relative to peers in orthographic processing circuits (i.e., fusiform gyrus)

64 ne the neural correlates of phonological and orthographic processing in 14 healthy right-handed men (

65 the common cognitive operations involved in orthographic processing in all writing systems, are disc

66 ed to reliably map brain regions involved in orthographic processing in individual subjects.

67 An open question is whether orthographic processing is limited to visual circuits th

68 inaccurate characterization of the study of orthographic processing is not conducive to the advancem

69 age, recent research and theory suggest that orthographic processing may derive from the exaptation o

70 the orthographic code." Frost suggests that orthographic processing must therefore differ between or

71 Interest in orthographic processing reflects an expansion, not const

72 isition is the convergence of the speech and orthographic processing systems onto a common network of

73 are using a qualitatively different mode of orthographic processing than is traditionally observed i

74 e, I argue that front-end implementations of orthographic processing that do not stem from a comprehe

75 A new wave of computational models of orthographic processing that offer various forms of nois

76 I tasks captured semantic, phonological, and orthographic processing to shed light on the nature of t

77 what the reader must do with the results of orthographic processing.

78 writing systems shape the characteristics of orthographic processing.

79 , existing evidence also implicates degraded orthographic processing.

80 iform cortex (BA 37), a region implicated in orthographic processing.

81 honological processing in tasks that require orthographic processing.

82 engaged in phonological, but not semantic or orthographic, processing.

83 With orthographic projection of a 3D stimulus onto a 2D plane

84 For example, an orthographic projection of dots on the surface of a rota

85 Under orthographic projection this matrix is of rank 3.

86 asymmetric unit (IAU) using azimuthal polar orthographic projections, otherwise known as Phi-Psi (Ph

87 iminate words from nonwords picked up on the orthographic properties that define words and used this

88 perceptual contributions to phonological and orthographic reading development.

89 ion performance explained unique variance in orthographic reading performance.

90 during phonological (pseudoword) than during orthographic (real word) pronunciation.

91 Electrophysiologically, effects of orthographic regularity and familiarity were apparent as

92 e the lmFG is involved in multiple stages of orthographic representation.

93 that typical children automatically activate orthographic representations during spoken language proc

94 The nature of orthographic representations in the human brain is still

95 older children who focus more on whole-word orthographic representations may make smaller proficienc

96 s often fail to attain competency in reading orthographic scripts which encode the sound properties o

97 lts provide further support for early morpho-orthographic segmentation processes that operate indepen

98 eractions between brain regions dedicated to orthographic, semantic, and phonological processing whil

99 n early lmFG activity was consistent with an orthographic similarity space.

100 ensitivity explained independent variance in orthographic skill but not phonological ability, and aud

101 ity covaried with phonological skill but not orthographic skill.

102 e that the QTL affects both phonological and orthographic skills and is not specific to phoneme aware

103 pmental time course for automatic sublexical orthographic specialization, extending beyond the age of

104 ist-level visual representation sensitive to orthographic statistics, and a later stage that reflects

105 ural activation elicited by these unattended orthographic stimuli was recorded using multi-channel wh

106 stems, with no visual component exclusive to orthographic stimuli.

107 tex the earliest component tuned to familiar orthographic stimuli.

108 tly smaller role (if any) in the response to orthographic stimuli.

109 eled without considering the manner in which orthographic structure represents phonological, semantic

110 e critical distributional characteristics of orthographic structure that govern reading behavior.

111 speakers of European languages in which the orthographic system codes explicitly for speech sounds.

112 nological and semantic decoding in different orthographic systems.

113 a role for this area in subword mapping from orthographic to phonological representations.

114 istency and lexicality, indicating a role in orthographic to phonological transformation.

115 t inferior parietal region subserves subword orthographic-to-phonological processes that are recruite

116 The present study shed light on how orthographic transparency constrains grain size and visu

117 to read in two languages differing in their orthographic transparency yields different strategies us

118 were highly similar for the phonological and orthographic versions of each task type.

119 eports about the specificity of this area in orthographic versus nonorthographic processing.

120 dent lexical access, phonological word form, orthographic word form and motor speech by the pattern o

121 entation sufficient for the individuation of orthographic word forms.

122 sound consistency in the transformation from orthographic (word form) to phonological (word sound) re

123 region or left ventral temporal cortex, and orthographic working memory deficits primarily arising f