I asked
>>>> I see the common sense in the notion that spelling "inconsistencies"
>>>> burden
>>>> the memory, but is it correct? Is there any kind of hard evidence to that
>>>> effect?
What I meant was:
Is there any kind of hard evidence that shows any kind of correlation
between "spelling inconsistencies" and "memory burden". I for one am not
quite sure what "memory burden" (or "spelling inconsistencies" for that
matter) means exactly, but I do find the idea interesting since it is so
dominant among non-linguists (and maybe also among linguists): "Language
irregularities and exceptions are a learning burden." Is there evidence for
that?
Or, to invoke Stephen Krashen's old distinction: Is there any evidence that
language irregularities and exceptions are an acquisition burden?
The kinds of metaphors involved: "consistency, regularity" and "burden" make
me suspect not, but I would love to be enlightened.
Ole Stig Andersen
Copenhagen
|