Editing Logogram (section)

=== Differences in processing of logographic and phonologic writing systems ===

Because much research on [[language processing in the brain|language processing]] has centered on English and other alphabetically written languages, many theories of language processing have stressed the role of phonology in producing speech. Contrasting logographically coded languages, where a single character is represented phonetically and ideographically, with phonetically/phonemically spelled languages has yielded insights into how different languages rely on different processing mechanisms. Studies on the processing of logographically coded languages have amongst other things looked at neurobiological differences in processing, with one area of particular interest being hemispheric lateralization. Since logographically coded languages are more closely associated with images than alphabetically coded languages, several researchers have hypothesized that right-side activation should be more prominent in logographically coded languages. Although some studies have yielded results consistent with this hypothesis there are too many contrasting results to make any final conclusions about the role of hemispheric lateralization in orthographically versus phonetically coded languages.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hanavan|first=Kevin|author2=Jeffrey Coney |title=Hemispheric asymmetry in the processing of Japanese script|journal=Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition|year=2005|volume=10|issue=5|pages=413–428|doi=10.1080/13576500442000184|pmid=16191812|s2cid=20404324}}</ref>

Another topic that has been given some attention is differences in processing of homophones. Verdonschot et al.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vedonschot |first1=R. G. |last2=La Heij |first2=W. |last3=Paolieri |first3=D. |last4=Zhang |first4=Q. F. |last5=Schiller |first5=N. O. |title=Homophonic context effects when naming Japanese kanji: evidence for processing costs |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology |date=2011 |volume=64 |issue=9 |pages=1836–1849 |doi=10.1080/17470218.2011.585241 |pmid=21722063 |url=https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/18428/Verdonschot_et_al_QJEP_2011%5b1%5d.pdf?sequence=7 |hdl=1887/18428 |s2cid=8557066 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> examined differences in the time it took to read a homophone out loud when a picture that was either related or unrelated <ref>{{cite journal |last1=Verdonschot |first1=R. G. |last2=LaHeij |first2=W. |last3=Schiller |first3=N. O. |title=Semantic context effects when naming Japanese kanji, but not Chinese hànzì |journal=Cognition |date=2010 |volume=115 |issue=3 |pages=512–518 |doi=10.1016/j.cognition.2010.03.005|pmid=20338551 |hdl=1887/15874 |s2cid=13841933 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> to a homophonic character was presented before the character. Both Japanese and Chinese homophones were examined. Whereas word production of alphabetically coded languages (such as English) has shown a relatively robust immunity to the effect of context stimuli,<ref name="Hino et al.">{{cite journal |last1=Hino |first1=Y. |last2=Kusunose |first2=Y. |last3=Lupker |first3=S. J. |last4=Jared |first4=D. |title=The Processing Advantage and Disadvantage for Homophones in Lexical Decision Tasks |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition |date=2012 |doi=10.1037/a0029122 |pmid=22905930 |volume=39 |issue=2 |pages=529–551}}</ref>  Verdschot et al.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vedonschot |first1=R. G. |last2=La Heij |first2=W. |last3=Paolieri |first3=D. |last4=Zhang |first4=Q. F. |last5=Schiller |first5=N. O. |title=Homophonic context effects when naming Japanese kanji: Evidence for processing costs |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology |date=2011 |volume=64 |issue=9 |pages=1836–1849 |doi=10.1080/17470218.2011.585241|url=https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/18428/Verdonschot_et_al_QJEP_2011%5b1%5d.pdf?sequence=7 |hdl=1887/18428 |pmid=21722063 |s2cid=8557066 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> found that Japanese homophones seem particularly sensitive to these types of effects. Specifically, reaction times were shorter when participants were presented with a phonologically related picture before being asked to read a target character out loud. An example of a phonologically related stimulus from the study would be for instance when participants were presented with a picture of an elephant, which is pronounced ''zou'' in Japanese, before being presented with the Chinese character {{lang|zh|造}}, which is also read ''zou''. No effect of phonologically related context pictures were found for the reaction times for reading Chinese words. A comparison of the (partially) logographically coded languages Japanese and Chinese is interesting because whereas the Japanese language consists of more than 60% homographic heterophones (characters that can be read two or more different ways), most Chinese characters only have one reading. Because both languages are logographically coded, the difference in latency in reading aloud Japanese and Chinese due to context effects cannot be ascribed to the logographic nature of the writing systems. Instead, the authors hypothesize that the difference in latency times is due to additional processing costs in Japanese, where the reader cannot rely solely on a direct orthography-to-phonology route, but information on a lexical-syntactical level must also be accessed in order to choose the correct pronunciation. This hypothesis is confirmed by studies finding that Japanese [[Alzheimer's disease]] patients whose comprehension of characters had deteriorated still could read the words out loud with no particular difficulty.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Nakamura |first1=K. |last2=Meguro |first2=K. |last3=Yamazaki |first3=H. |last4=Ishizaki |first4=J. |last5=Saito |first5=H. |last6=Saito |first6=N. |title=Kanji predominant alexia in advanced Alzheimer's disease |journal=Acta Neurologica Scandinavica |date=1998 |volume=97 |issue=4 |pages=237–243 |display-authors=etal |doi = 10.1111/j.1600-0404.1998.tb00644.x|pmid=9576638 |s2cid=45244075 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sasanuma |first1=S. |last2=Sakuma |first2=N. |last3=Kitano |first3=K. |title=Reading kanji without semantics: Evidence from a longitudinal study of dementia |journal=Cognitive Neuropsychology |date=1992 |volume=9 |issue=6 |pages=465–486 |doi=10.1080/02643299208252068}}</ref>

Studies contrasting the processing of English and Chinese homophones in [[lexical decision task]]s have found an advantage for homophone processing in Chinese, and a disadvantage for processing homophones in English.<ref>See Hino et al. (2012) for a brief review of the literature.</ref> The processing disadvantage in English is usually described in terms of the relative lack of homophones in the English language. When a homophonic word is encountered, the phonological representation of that word is first activated. However, since this is an ambiguous stimulus, a matching at the orthographic/lexical ("mental dictionary") level is necessary before the stimulus can be disambiguated, and the correct pronunciation can be chosen. In contrast, in a language (such as Chinese) where many characters with the same reading exists, it is hypothesized that the person reading the character will be more familiar with homophones, and that this familiarity will aid the processing of the character, and the subsequent selection of the correct pronunciation, leading to shorter reaction times when attending to the stimulus. In an attempt to better understand homophony effects on processing, Hino et al.<ref name="Hino et al." /> conducted a series of experiments using Japanese as their target language. While controlling for familiarity, they found a processing advantage for homophones over non-homophones in Japanese, similar to what has previously been found in Chinese. The researchers also tested whether orthographically similar homophones would yield a disadvantage in processing, as has been the case with English homophones,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Haigh |first1=C. A. |last2=Jared |first2=D. |title=The activation of phonological representations by bilinguals while reading silently: Evidence from interlingual homophones |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition |year=2007 |volume=33 |issue=4 |pages=623–644 |doi=10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.623|pmid=17576144 }} Citing Ferrand & Grainger 2003, Haigh & Jared 2004.</ref> but found no evidence for this. It is evident that there is a difference in how homophones are processed in logographically coded and alphabetically coded languages, but whether the advantage for processing of homophones in the logographically coded languages Japanese and Chinese (i.e. their writing systems) is due to the logographic nature of the scripts, or if it merely reflects an advantage for languages with more homophones regardless of script nature, remains to be seen.