Cited by 36Reading and Literacy DevelopmentSecond Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

Morphological awareness in biliteracy acquisition: A study of young Chinese EFL readers

Zhang, Dongbo, Koda, Keiko, Sun, Xiaoxi·2014·International Journal of Bilingualism

Abstract

This study examined contribution of morphological awareness to reading comprehension in two typologically diverse languages, focusing on young Chinese EFL (English as a Foreign Language) readers in China. It was particularly interested in how cross-linguistic similarities and variations in morphological awareness affected its transfer in Chinese–English biliteracy acquisition. Grades 5 and 6 children were measured in compound awareness and reading comprehension in English, and compound awareness, radical awareness, and reading comprehension in Chinese. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that compound awareness contributed to reading comprehension within both Chinese and English. In addition, over and above English compound awareness and Chinese reading comprehension, Chinese compound awareness, but not radical awareness, explained a unique amount of variance in English reading comprehension. After Chinese compound awareness was controlled for, English compound awareness, however, did not make a significant contribution to Chinese reading comprehension. These findings were discussed in light of the common and language/script-dependent aspects of morphological awareness in Chinese and English and the context of biliteracy acquisition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1367006912450953

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Chinese morphological compounding predicted English reading comprehension in Zhang et al.'s (2014) study.

    “Although Zhang et al.'s (2014) study on Chinese children learning English showed that Chinese morphological compounding predicted English reading comprehension”
  • The findings regarding whether L2 morphological awareness predicted L1 reading are inconsistent.

    “However, the findings regard -ing whether L2 morphological awareness predicted L1 reading are inconsistent.”
  • Zhang et al.'s (2014) study did not show the association between English morphological compounding and Chinese reading comprehension.

    “their study did not show the association between English morphological compounding and Chinese reading comprehension.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, D., Koda, K., & Sun, X.
Affiliations
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • Singapore Centre for Chinese Language, Singapore
Venue
International Journal of Bilingualism
Published
2012-09-12
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
570-585
ISSN
  • 1367-0069 (ISSN-L)
  • 1756-6878
OpenAlex
W2069313658
Cited by
33
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Bilingualism (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
morphological awareness, biliteracy, reading comprehension, language transfer, Chinese-English bilingualism, young learners

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review