The Effects of Lower-Level Processing Skills on FL Reading Performance: Implications for Instruction.

tionship between lower-level verbal processing skills and foreign language reading proficiency. Previous research findings in first language (L1) reading suggest four major reader-related factors: 1) aspects of linguistic knowledgesuch as orthographic knowledge (e.g., 41; 55), morphosyntactic knowledge (e.g., 61; 64; 65), and vocabulary knowledge (e.g., 2; 11; 44); 2) background knowledge (e.g., 3; 21); 3) cognitive and metacognitive skills (e.g., 4; 39; 24; 57); and 4) lower-level verbal processing skills (e.g., 58, 59; 38; 49; 47; 13). These L1 factors also have a significant impact on second (L2) and foreign language (FL) reading comprehension. L2/FL reading studies have demonstrated that linguistic knowledge (e.g., 15; 16; 18; 14), background knowledge (e.g., 8; 60; 34; 6), and cognitive and metacognitive skills (e.g., 7; 9; 12; 10) contribute heavily to L2 reading comprehension. Little attention, however, has been paid to the relationship between lower-level verbal processing skills and L2 reading comprehension. Lower-level processing refers to the processes involved in extracting visual information from print, such as letter identification and word recognition, which can be contrasted with higher-level processing, such as syntactic manipulation and inter-sentential text integration. A number of theorists in cognitive psychology claim that deficiency in lower-level processing operations strains the limited capacity of short-term memory, and inhibits text integ ation into a meaningful sequence (e.g., 47; 52; 58; 17; 56; 30). The limited-capacity model hus predicts that when a reader is heavily involv d in lower-level processing operations, fe er cognitive capacities are available for higher-level processing (e.g., integrating intersentential information, making inferences, drawing upon prior knowledge) and poor comprehension is inevitable. Interestingly, it has also been observed that low quality (i.e., slow and inaccurate) verbal processing skills produce individual differences in reading comprehension even among college-level L1 readers as well (e.g., 28; 29; 13; 47). Since L2/FL reading often involves learning e linguistic codes, we can expect that lowerlevel proc ssing skills play an even more critical role in L2/FL reading than in L1 reading. Despite its theoretical and pedagogical importance, however, the issue has received little attention among L2 reading researchers. The paucity of data may be attributable to the widespr ad belief that linguistic knowledge is only a prerequisite in the acquisition of verbal processing skills, leading to the further assumption that verbal processing skills develop automatically as linguistic proficiency improves (e.g., 43; 18). Several L1 studies, however, have shown that lower-level processing skills account for individual differences in reading comprehension among native speakers (e.g., 29; 49; 47; 48; 13), thus suggesting that linguistic knowledge alone does not guarantee the subsequent development of verbal processing skills. More importantly, recent bilingual research has also demonstrated that inefficient word recognition is associated with slower L2 reading rates among otherwise fluent bilingual subjects (53). All of The Modern Language Journal, 76, iv (1992) 0026-7902/92/502-12 $1.50/0 ? 1992 The Modern Language Journal