In order to determine whether bilingual (Spanish/English) readers of English are less efficient in using language cues than are monolinguals (English), the Reading Miscue Inventory (RMI) was used to analyze the reading performances of 60 subjects--ten bilinguals and ten monolinguals each in fourth, fifth, and sixth grades. Subjects read orally at their instructional and frustrational levels, in
... [Show full abstract] basal readers and from a science text. Each subject's word attack errors or miscues were analyzed according to the diagnostic concepts in the RMI. Results showed that the monolinguals demonstrated more sensitivity to grammatical and semantic cues and that the relationship between miscues and comprehension is different for monolinguals and bilinguals--miscues are less apt to result in a comprehension loss for monolinguals. This research supports Loban's conclusion (1966) that language ability is necessary for competence in reading. (Tables of findings are included.) (JM)