Literature DB >> 24246693

Processing of zero-derived words in English: an fMRI investigation.

Christos Pliatsikas1, Linda Wheeldon2, Aditi Lahiri3, Peter C Hansen4.   

Abstract

Derivational morphological processes allow us to create new words (e.g. punish (V) to noun (N) punishment) from base forms. The number of steps from the basic units to derived words often varies (e.g., nationality<national<nation: two-steps) and there is evidence that complex derivations cause more brain activity than simple ones (Meinzer, Lahiri, Flaisch, Hannemann, & Eulitz, 2009). However, all studies to date have investigated derivational processes in which morphological complexity is related to a change in surface form. It is therefore unclear whether the effects reported are attributable to underlying morphological complexity or to the processing of multiple surface morphemes. Here we report the first study to investigate morphological processing where derivational steps are not overtly marked (e.g., bridge-N>bridge-V) i.e., zero-derivation (Aronoff, 1980). We compared the processing of one-step (soaking<soak-V) and two-step (bridging<bridge-V<bridge-N) derivations together with monomorphemic control words (grumble) in an fMRI experiment. Participants were presented with derived forms of words (soaking, bridging) in a lexical decision task. Although the surface derived -ing forms can be contextually participles, gerunds, or even nouns, they are all derived from verbs since the suffix -ing can only be attached to verb roots. Crucially, the verb root is the basic form for the one-step words, whereas for the two-step words the verb root is zero derived from a basic noun. Significantly increased brain activity was observed for complex (one-step and two-step) versus simple (zero-step) forms in regions involved in morphological processing, such as the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG). Critically, activation was also more pronounced for two-step compared to one-step forms. Since both types of derived words have the same surface structure, our findings suggest that morphological processing is based on underlying morphological complexity, independent of overt affixation. This study is the first to provide evidence for the processing of zero derivation, and demonstrates that morphological processing cannot be reduced to surface form-based segmentation.
© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Functional MRI; LIFG; Morphology; Zero derivation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24246693     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  5 in total

1.  Neurocognitive correlates of category ambiguous verb processing: The single versus dual lexical entry hypotheses.

Authors:  Sladjana Lukic; Aya Meltzer-Asscher; James Higgins; Todd B Parrish; Cynthia K Thompson
Journal:  Brain Lang       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 2.381

2.  The neural correlates of morphological complexity processing: Detecting structure in pseudowords.

Authors:  Swetlana Schuster; Mathias Scharinger; Colin Brooks; Aditi Lahiri; Gesa Hartwigsen
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  L2 speakers decompose morphologically complex verbs: fMRI evidence from priming of transparent derived verbs.

Authors:  Sophie De Grauwe; Kristin Lemhöfer; Roel M Willems; Herbert Schriefers
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-10-10       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  Word Category Conversion Revisited: The Case of Adjectives and Participles in L1 and L2 German.

Authors:  Andreas Opitz; Denisa Bordag
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-05-28

5.  How Do We Segment Text? Two-Stage Chunking Operation in Reading.

Authors:  Jinbiao Yang 杨金骉; Qing Cai 蔡清; Xing Tian 田兴
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2020-06-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.