The Nature of a Writing System Shapes the Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms for Reading Acquisition

Abstract Writing systems are cultural inventions that differ in how they represent spoken language. We tested how the brain learns to map arbitrary visual symbols to sound and meaning by comparing neural activity for artificial writing systems that were either alphabetic (systematic symbol-sound mappings) or logographic (arbitrary symbol-sound mappings). Twenty-four adults learned to read aloud and comprehend novel words written in each system. After 2 weeks of training, functional magnetic resonance imaging during reading comprehension revealed that the dorsal pathway (inferior parietal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-sound, was more active for the alphabetic system, whereas the ventral pathway (anterior fusiform gyrus, middle temporal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-meaning, was more active for the logographic system. Combined with performance differences, these findings indicate that systematic symbol-sound mappings allowed the brain to bridge the interface between vision and meaning via sound, whereas an absence of systematicity made it more efficient to link vision directly to meaning. Thus, the same brain finds different solutions to the problem of reading that capitalise on the statistical properties of culturally invented writing systems.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Neurobiology of Language
Published
2026-03-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1162/nol.a.248
Primary Topic
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Nature of a Writing System Shapes the Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms for Reading Acquisition

Neurobiology of Language
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
article

The Nature of a Writing System Shapes the Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms for Reading Acquisition

article en

Abstract

Abstract Writing systems are cultural inventions that differ in how they represent spoken language. We tested how the brain learns to map arbitrary visual symbols to sound and meaning by comparing neural activity for artificial writing systems that were either alphabetic (systematic symbol-sound mappings) or logographic (arbitrary symbol-sound mappings). Twenty-four adults learned to read aloud and comprehend novel words written in each system. After 2 weeks of training, functional magnetic resonance imaging during reading comprehension revealed that the dorsal pathway (inferior parietal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-sound, was more active for the alphabetic system, whereas the ventral pathway (anterior fusiform gyrus, middle temporal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-meaning, was more active for the logographic system. Combined with performance differences, these findings indicate that systematic symbol-sound mappings allowed the brain to bridge the interface between vision and meaning via sound, whereas an absence of systematicity made it more efficient to link vision directly to meaning. Thus, the same brain finds different solutions to the problem of reading that capitalise on the statistical properties of culturally invented writing systems.

Neurobiology of Language
OTH Regensburg (DE), Royal Holloway University of London (GB), University College London (GB), University of Regensburg (DE)
Economic and Social Research Council, Royal Holloway, University of London
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.