Morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic processing in word recognition and production: evidence from ambiguous morphemes

References

• Allen, M., & Badecker, W. (1999). Stem homograph inhibition and stem allomorphy: Representing and processing inflected forms in a multilevel lexical system. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(1), 105–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 37(1), 94–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Levelt, W. J. M., Schreuder, R., & Ernestus, M. (2008). Paradigmatic structure in speech production. Chicago Linguistics Society, 43, 1–29. http://cls.metapress.com/content/rg1821332063vh83/.
   Google Scholar
• Badecker, W., & Allen, M. (2002). Morphological parsing and the perception of lexical identity: A masked priming study of stem homographs. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 125–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertram, R., Laine, M., Baayen, R. H., Schreuder, R., & Hyönä, J. (2000). Affixal homonymy triggers full-form storage, even for inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language. Cognition, 74(2), B13–B25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2000). The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy, and productivity Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 489–511. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/26/2/489/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2000). The semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm: Does the response set matter?. Cognition, 75(2), B51–B64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caramazza, A., Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Bi, Y. (2001). The specific-word frequency effect: Implications for the representation of homophones in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1430–1450. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/27/6/1430/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carreiras, M., Perdomo, A., & Meseguer, E. (2005). Are stem homographs and orthographic neighbors processed differently during silent reading? Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 317–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., Coltheart, M., & Nickels, L. (2010). ‘Fell’ primes ‘fall’, but does ‘bell’ prime ‘ball’? Masked priming with irregularly-inflected primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 83–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, M. H., & Rastle, K. (2010). Form and meaning in early morphological processing: Comment on Feldman, O'Connor and Moscoso del Prado Martin. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 749–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dohmes, P., Zwitserlood, P., & Bölte, J. (2004). The impact of semantic transparency of morphologically complex words on picture naming. Brain and Language, 90, 203–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 429–446. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0749596X88900666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, L. B. (2000). Are morphological effects distinguishable from the effects of shared meaning and shared form?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1431–1444. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/26/6/1431/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, L. B., O'Connor, P. A., & Moscoso del Prado Martin, F. (2009). Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: A violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 684–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116–124. http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03195503.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 829–856. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/23/4/829/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frost, R., Grainger, J., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Advances in morphological processing: An introduction. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 933–941.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frost, R., Grainger, J., & Rastle, K. (2005). Current issues in morphological processing: An introduction. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 1–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonnerman, L. M., Seidenberg, M. S., & Andersen, E. S. (2007). Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 323–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koester, D., & Schiller, N. O. (2008). Morphological priming in overt language production: Electrophysiological evidence from Dutch. NeuroImage, 42, 1622–1630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolan, L., Leikin, M., & Zwitserlood, P. (2011). Morphological processing and lexical access in speech production in Hebrew: Evidence from picture-word interference. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 286–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavric, A., Rastle, K., & Clapp, A. (2011). What do fully visible primes and brain potentials reveal about morphological decomposition? Journal of Psychophysiology, 48, 676–686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=4947BE89D5ABC14E7A156D851ABE5B73.journals?fromPage=online&aid=31523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G., Gibson, M., Yoon, Y. B., & Sandra, D. (2003). Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, 84, 50–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 313–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüttmann, H., Zwitserlood, P., Böhl, A., & Bölte, J. (2011). Evidence for morphological composition at the form level in speech production. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23, 818–836.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüttmann, H., Zwitserlood, P., & Bölte, J. (2011). Sharing morphemes without sharing meaning: Production and comprehension of German verbs in the context of morphological relatives. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(3), 173–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101(1), 3–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meunier, F., & Longtin, C.-M. (2007). Morphological decomposition and semantic integration in word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 457–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (2005). The representation of homophones: Evidence from the distractor-frequency effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1360–1371. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/31/6/1360/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packard, J. L. (1999). Lexical access in Chinese Speech comprehension and production. Brain and Language, 68(1–2), 89–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 942–971.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 507–537.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., & New, B. (2004). The broth in my brother's brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1090–1098.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodd, J., Gaskell, G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2002). Making sense of semantic ambiguity: Semantic competition in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 245–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roelofs, A. (1996). Serial order in planning the production of successive morphemes of a word. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 854–876.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roelofs, A., & Baayen, H. (2002). Morphology by itself in planning the production of spoken words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(1), 132–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rueckl, J. G., & Aicher, K. A. (2008). Are CORNER and BROTHER morphologically complex? Not in the long term. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23, 972–1001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandra, D. (1990). On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42A, 529–567. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14640749008401236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–659.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 271–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Forster, K. J. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Forster, K. J. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 607–620.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., Liu, Y., & Zhu, X. (1999). Morphemic processing in reading Chinese. In J. Wang, A. Inhoff & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis, (pp. 91–114). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 277–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsang, Y.-K., & Chen, H.-C. (2010). Morphemic ambiguity resolution in Chinese: Activation of the subordinate meaning with a prior dominant-biased context. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 875–881.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, A. W.-K., & Chen, H.-C. (2008). Processing segmental and prosodic information in Cantonese word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1172–1190. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xlm/34/5/1172/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, X., Marslen-Wilson, W., Taft, M., & Shu, H. (1999). Morphology, orthography, and phonology in reading Chinese compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 525–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwitserlood, P., Bölte, J., & Dohmes, P. (2000). Morphological effects on speech production: Evidence from picture naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 563–591.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwitserlood, P., Bölte, J., & Dohmes, P. (2002). Where and how morphologically complex words interplay with naming pictures. Brain and Language, 81, 358–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar