Literature DB >> 12081422

The processing and representation of Dutch and English compounds: peripheral morphological and central orthographic effects.

Nivja H de Jong1, Laurie B Feldman, Robert Schreuder, Matthew Pastizzo, R Harald Baayen.   

Abstract

In this study, we use the association between various measures of the morphological family and decision latencies to reveal the way in which the components of Dutch and English compounds are processed. The results show that for constituents of concatenated compounds in both languages, a position-related token count of the morphological family plays a role, whereas English open compounds show an effect of a type count, similar to the effect of family size for simplex words. When Dutch compounds are written with an artificial space, they reveal no effect of type count, which shows that the differential effect for the English open compounds is not superficial. The final experiment provides converging evidence for the lexical consequences of the space in English compounds. Decision latencies for English simplex words are better predicted from counts of the morphological family that include concatenated and hyphenated but not open family members. Copyright 2001 Elsevier Science (USA).

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12081422     DOI: 10.1006/brln.2001.2547

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Lang        ISSN: 0093-934X            Impact factor:   2.381


  10 in total

Review 1.  Are long compound words identified serially via their constituents? Evidence from an eye-movement-contingent display change study.

Authors:  Jukka Hyönä; Raymond Bertram; Alexander Pollatsek
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-06

2.  An Investigation into the Processing of Lexicalized English Blend Words: Evidence from Lexical Decisions and Eye Movements During Reading.

Authors:  Barbara J Juhasz; Rebecca L Johnson; Jennifer Brewer
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2017-04

Review 3.  From decomposition to distributed theories of morphological processing in reading.

Authors:  Patience Stevens; David C Plaut
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-05-20

4.  Task influences on the production and comprehension of compound words.

Authors:  Niels Janssen; Petra E Pajtas; Alfonso Caramazza
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-07

5.  Must analysis of meaning follow analysis of form? A time course analysis.

Authors:  Laurie B Feldman; Petar Milin; Kit W Cho; Fermín Moscoso Del Prado Martín; Patrick A O'Connor
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Cross-language activation of morphological relatives in cognates: the role of orthographic overlap and task-related processing.

Authors:  Kimberley Mulder; Ton Dijkstra; R Harald Baayen
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Morphological priming during language switching: an ERP study.

Authors:  Saskia E Lensink; Rinus G Verdonschot; Niels O Schiller
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Mixing positive and negative valence: Affective-semantic integration of bivalent words.

Authors:  Michael Kuhlmann; Markus J Hofmann; Benny B Briesemeister; Arthur M Jacobs
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  LADEC: The Large Database of English Compounds.

Authors:  Christina L Gagné; Thomas L Spalding; Daniel Schmidtke
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2019-10

10.  Accentuate the positive: semantic access in english compounds.

Authors:  Victor Kuperman
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-04-24
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.