********** (*, **, ***, **** ).., 2002, 7, 1, 49-64..,,. 1. 4, 5 6 72,. 4,, 50 %, 34 %, 8 %, 5 75 %, 67 %, 13 %, 6 95 %, 51 %., (,, ), (,, )..888,.448,.361.,,,,... :,,,,,,,..... (Catts, 1989). (Wagner & 49
T orgesen, 1987). (Ball & Blachman, 1991).,. (Hakes, 1982). Swank (1994) (speech sound play)(rhyming alliteration).. Liberman et al. (1974) 4, 5 6. 4 5 17 % 50 %. 670 %, 90 %. Liberman et al. (1974),,.. Swank (1994). Swank & Larrivee (1998),,,,,,. (Bradely & Bryant, 1985). (1999). (grapheme). Catts (1989). Bradly & Bryant (1978)... Gilbertson & Bramlett (1998) 91,, 50
1.. Swank & Catts (1994)., 4, 5,... 4, 5, 6,.. 1. 4, 5, 6. 1:1.. ( ) (, 1995), (, 1994), KEDI-WISC (, 1987). 6-1 SD. 2.. Swank & Larrivee (1998) (1997),. 51
, (1999).,,,,. Catts (1993), Gilbertson & Bramlett (1998) Swank & Larrivee (1998).,,,,,,,,. 3, 4, 5 (, 1972) (, 1980).,,.. 19 5;11 14 5;11 (, 1996).. 7 ( )... (1), 2 6..,?..?. ( )?. (phonetic sound) 52
. < - 1> ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (2), 2 6..,,?. < - 2> 2 3 ( ) ( ) CV 1 CVC 1 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 53
.?. ( )?. (phonetic sound). (3), 2 6..,,,,?..,,?.,,,?. (phonetic sound). < - 3>,, /,,,, /,, /,,,, /,,,,,, /,,,, /,,,,,, /,,,,,, /,,,, /,, /,,,, /,, /,, 54
. () () Swank & Catts (1994). 6 (, 1989). (, 1995). 3, 4, 5 (, 1972) (, 1998). (, 1994) 5;11,,,,. 2 3 10 20.. < - 4> () 2 3 3. 2000 6 1 8 30 3 55
1 1..,, KEDI- WISC. 6-1 SD 90 %. 1 3 2-1 SD.. 4. SPSS 9.0., Scheffé.. 1 2. 2 5 ( 20 %). 98 %.. 1. 4, 5, 6 4 30.39 %, 5 51.54 %, 6 81.70 %..,,,. 6 95 %, 51 %. 5 75 %, 56
67 %, 13 %. 4 50 %, 34 %, 8 %. (,, ), (,, )., (,, ), (,, ). 4, 5, 6. 4, 5, 6 4 5. < - 5> F p 4.853 6.440.001*.000* *p <.05 < - 6>, F p 4 8.96 (50 %) 4.98 5 13.46 (75 %) 4.21 32.87.000* 6 17.79 (99 %) 0.41 4 6.08 (34 %) 4.15 5 12.12 (67 %) 5.04 49.48.000* 6 17.12 (96 %) 1.36 4 1.38 (8 %) 1.10 5 2.25 (13 %) 1.60 53.33.000* 6 9.21 (51 %) 4.60 *p <.05 57
< - 7> (Scheffé) (I)- (J) (I)- (J) p 4 5 5 6-4.50* - 4.33*.000*.000* 4 5 5 6-6.04* - 5.0*.000*.000* 4 5 5 6-0.88-6.96*.577.000* *p <.05 < - 8>, F p 4 5 6 4.17 (23.17 %) 8.42 (46.78 %) 15.0 (83.30 %) 3.92 4.19 1.62 60.378.000* 4 5 6 4.67 (25.94 %) 8.96 (49.78 %) 14.25 (79.17 %) 4.39 3.76 2.19 43.423.000* 4 5 6 7.58 (42.11 %) 10.46 (58.11 %) 14.88 (82.67 %) 2.41 3.27 2.46 43.092.000* *p <.05 < - 9> 4, 5, 6 (I) - (J) p 4 - - - - 0.50-3.42-2.92.528.000*.002* 5 - - - - 0.54-2.04-1.50.393.002*.062 6 - - - 0.75 0.13-0.63.023*.737.118 *p <.05 58
<- 1> <- 2> 2..,, -.888, -.448, -.361..892,.866,.783. < - 10>,.888**.448**.361** *p <.01.. 59
,,,,. 6 45. Swank (1994) Morais (1991).,,,.,,.. 4, 5 6. 4, 5, 6 4, 5.,. Swank & Catts (1994) 154 ( 80.2),,,.,,. (70 %), (58 %), (37 %), (32 %).,,.,. 1 4, 5, 6,,, 3. (.888) (.448) (.361). Swank & Catts (1994), Gilbertson & Bramlett (1998). Swank & Catts (1994). 60
. Catts (1993) (Specific Language Impairment). Jorm & Share (1983)...., 4, 5, 6 72..,.,...,...,..,.. (1989).., 1, 25-75. (1998)... (1994).. :. 61
(1996).. -, 1, 7-33. (1995).. :. (1987).. :. (1994).., 7(1), 151-163. (1995).. ( ),, 223-231. (1980).. :. (1972). 3, 4, 5., 19, 337-426. (1999).., 37(1), 389-406. (1997)... Ball, E. & Blachman, B. A. (1991) Does phonemic awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? R eading R esearch Quarterly, 26, 49-66. Bradley, I. & Bryant, P. (1978). Difficulties in auditory organizer as a possible cause of reading backwardness. N ature, 271, 746-747. Bradley, I. & Bryant, P. (1985). R hym e and reason in reading and sp elling. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Catts, H. W. (1989) Phonological processing deficits and reading disabilities. In A. G. Kamhi & H. W. Catts (Eds.), R eading disabilities: A develop m ental lang uag e p ersp ective. Boston: College- Hill Press. Catts, H. W. (1993). T he relationship between speech- language impairment and reading disabilities. Journeal of Sp eech and H earing R esearch, 36, 948-958. Gilbertson, M. & Bramlett, R. K. (1998). Phonological awareness screening to identify at- risk readers : Implications for practitioners. Lang uag e, Sp eech, and H earing S ervices in Schools, 29, 109-116. Hakes, D. (1982) T he development of metalinguistic abilities: What develops? In S. Kuczaj (Ed.), Lang uag e, cognition, and culture. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Jorm, A. & Share, D. (1983) Phonological reading and reading acquisition. App lied Psycholing uistics, 4, 103-147. Liberman, I. Y., Shankweiler, D., Fischer, F. W. & Carter, B. (1974) Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child. J ournal of Exp erim ental Child Psy chology, 18, 201-212. Morais, J. (1991) Phonological awareness: A bridge between language and literacy. In D. J. Sawyer & B. J. Fox (Eds.), Phonolog ical awareness and reading: The evolution of current p ersp ectives. New York: Springer- Verlag. Swank, L. K. (1994). Phonological coding abilities: Identification of impairments related to phonologically based reading problems. Top ics in Lang uag e D isorders, 14(2), 56-71. 62
Swank, L. K. & Catts, H. W. (1994). Phonological awareness and written word decoding. Lang uag e, Sp eech, and H earing S ervices in Schools, 25, 9-14. Swank, L. K. & Larrivee, L. S. (1998) Phonology, metaphonology, and the development of literacy. In R. Paul (Ed.), Exp loring the sp eech- lang uag e connection: Comm unication and lang uag e intervention, Series 8. Boston : Paul H. Brookes. Wagner, R. & T orgesen, J. (1987). T he nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psy cholog ical B ulletin, 101, 192-212. 63
AB ST RACT Development of Phonological Aw areness in Korean Children S ung In H on g (Yonsei Language, Speech Threapy Center) S ae Il Je on (College of Medicine, Pochon CHA University) S oy e on g P ae (Dept. of Speech Pathology & Audiology, Hallym University) Ikh w an L e e (Dept. of English Language and Literature, Yonsei University) Phonological awareness refers to the recognizing the speech- sound units and their forms in a word in spoken language. Phonological awareness progresses into word awareness, syllable awareness, and phonemic awareness step by step and is highly correlated with word reading which is the first step of reading. Especially phonological awareness has been identified as the primary predictor for reading rather than language ability or intellectual ability. The purpose of this study was to examine the development of phonologcal awreness of 72 normal Korean children between 4-6 years of age, and to see whether this phonological awareness influences word reading. Four-year- old children showed correct response of 50 % in word awareness, 34 % in syllable awareness, and 8 % in phonemic awareness. Fiveyear- old children showed correct response of 75 % in word awareness, 67 % in syllable awareness, and 13 % in phonemic awareness. Six-year- old children showed correct response of 95 % or more in word and syllable awareness, and 51 % in phonemic awareness. The scores of phonological awareness changed depending on the age, the type of phonological awareness tasks (deletion, blending, categorization), and the level of phonological awareness tasks (word, syllable, phoneme). Reading and phonological awareness correlation score was.888, reading and PPVT - K correlation score was.448, and reading and KEDI-WISC correlation score was.361. The highest score obtained was the correlation between reading achievement and phonological awareness. This result may indicate that the phonological awareness of Korean children develops in the order of word level, syllable level, and phonemic level in line with the increase in age. The correlation analysis shows that phonological awarenes is highly correlated with early reading rather than PPVT - K or KEDI-WISC. There is a strong possibility that phonological awareness is the primary predictor of early reading development. : 2002 1 30 : 2002 3 16 ( 1 ):, e- mail: slphong @dreamwiz.com ():, e- mail: chunscam@yahoo.com ():, e- mail: spae@hallym.ac.kr ():, e- mail: ihlee@yonsei.ac.kr 64