Goswami and Bryant (1990) proposed a theory of reading development based on
three causal connections. One of these causal connections was based on the
relationship between rhyming skills and reading development found in Engli
sh. To explain this connection, they suggested that young readers of Englis
h used analogies based on rimes as one means of deciphering the alphabetic
code. This proposal has recently become the subject of some debate. The mos
t serious critique has been advanced by Seymour and his colleagues (Duncan,
Seymour, & Hill, 1997; Seymour & Duncan, 1997; Seymour & Evans, 1994). The
se authors reported a series of studies with Scottish schoolchildren which,
they claim, show that progression in normal reading acquisition is from a
small unit (phonemic) approach in the initial stage to a large unit (rime-b
ased) approach at a later stage. Two experiments are presented which replic
ate those conducted by Seymour and his group with samples of English school
children. Different results are found. It is argued that methodological and
instructional factors may be very important for the conceptual interpretat
ion of studies attempting to pit "small" units (phonemes) against "large" u
nits (onsets and rimes) in reading. In particular, it is necessary to consi
der whether a given phonological awareness task requires the recognition of
shared phonological segments ("epilinguistic" processing) or the identific
ation and production of shared phonological segments (metalinguistic proces
sing). It is also important to take into account the nature of the literacy
instruction being implemented in participating schools. If the phonologica
l aspects of this tuition focus solely on phonemes (small units), then poor
rime-level (large unit) performance may be found in metalinguistic tasks.