Pseudo-morphemic structure inhibits, but morphemic structure facilitates, processing of a repeated free morpheme

References

• Amenta, S., Marelli, M., & Crepaldi, D. (2015). The fruitless effort of growing a fruitless tree: Early morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic effects in sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(5), 1587–1596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, S., Miller, B., & Rayner, K. (2004). Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1–2), 285–311. doi: 10.1080/09541440340000123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcara, G., Semenza, C., & Bambini, V. (2014). Word structure and decomposition effects in reading. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31(1–2), 184–218. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2014.903915
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodner, G. E., & Masson, M. E. J. (2004). Beyond binary judgments: Prime validity modulates masked repetition priming in the naming task. Memory & Cognition, 32(1), 1–11. doi: 10.3758/BF03195815
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodner, G. E., & Masson, M. E. J. (2014). Memory recruitment: A backwards idea about masked priming. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 61, 179–213. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-800283-4.00005-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronk, M., Zwitserlood, P., & Bölte, J. (2013). Manipulations of word frequency reveal differences in the processing of morphologically complex and simple words in German. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burani, C., Dovetto, F. M., Spuntarelli, A., & Thornton, A. M. (1999). Morpholexical access and naming: The semantic interpretability of new root-suffix combinations. Brain and Language, 68(1–2), 333–339. doi: 10.1006/brln.1999.2073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 2, pp. 257–294). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chialant, D., & Caramazza, A. (1995). Where is morphology and how is it processed? The case of written word recognition. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 55–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Johnson, R. L., & Rayner, K. (2005). Letter transpositions within and across morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(6), 1327–39.
   PubMed 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. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., & Davis, C. J. (2010). Morphemes in their place: Evidence for position-specific identification of suffixes. Memory & Cognition, 38(3), 312–321. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.3.312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., Davis, C. J., & Lupker, S. J. (2013). Seeing stems everywhere: Position-independent identification of stem morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(2), 510–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283–321. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2005). Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 75–114. doi: 10.1080/01690960444000197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drews, E., & Zwitserlood, P. (1995). Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(5), 1098–1116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Gvozdenović, V., O’Connor, P. A., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (2012). Semantic similarity influences early morphological priming in Serbian: A challenge to form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 668–676. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0250-x
   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 & Review, 16(4), 684–691. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.4.684
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorentino, R., & Fund-Reznicek, E. (2009). Masked morphological priming of compound constituents. The Mental Lexicon, 4(2), 159–193. doi: 10.1075/ml.4.2.01fio
   Google Scholar
• Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D. (2007). Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(7), 953–1000. doi: 10.1080/01690960701190215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10(4), 680–698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frauenfelder, U. H., & Schreuder, R. (1991). Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity. In G. Booji & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology (pp. 165–183). Kluwer: Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. (2017). Psycholinguistic approaches to morphology. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, 1. Retrieved from http://linguistics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-258 doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.258
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2009). Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 20–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2014). Conceptual composition: The role of relational competition in the comprehension of modifier-noun phrases and noun-noun compounds. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 97–130). New York: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2016). Effects of morphology and semantic transparency on typing latencies in English compound and pseudocompound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 1489–1495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2017). LADEC: Large database of English compounds. Manuscript in preparation.
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., Figueredo, L., & Mullaly, A. C. (2009). Does snow man prime plastic snow? The effect of constituent position in using relational information during the interpretation of modifier-noun phrases. The Mental Lexicon, 4(1), 41–76. doi: 10.1075/ml.4.1.03gag
   Google Scholar
• Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Nisbet, K. A. (2016). Processing English compounds: Investigating semantic transparency. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. Retrieved from http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL32/pdf_doc/01.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2000). Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming. Language & Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 421–444. doi: 10.1080/01690960050119652
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(1), 127–131. doi: 10.3758/BF03196148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103(3), 518–565. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.518
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inhoff, A. W. (1987). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of perceptual salience and word structure. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention & performance, XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 403–418). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Inhoff, A. W. (1989). Lexical access during eye fixations in reading: Are word access codes used to integrate lexical information across interword fixations? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 444–461. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(89)90021-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ji, H., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2011). Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 406–430. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperman, V. (2013). Accentuate the positive: Semantic access in English compounds. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(203), 1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Laudanna, A., & Burani, C. (1985). Address mechanisms to decomposed lexical entries. Linguistics, 23(5), 775–792. doi: 10.1515/ling.1985.23.5.775
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laudanna, A., & Burani, C. (1995). Distributional properties of derivational affixes: Implications for processing. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 345–364). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Lavric, A., Clapp, A., & Rastle, K. (2007). Erp evidence of morphological analysis from orthography: A masked priming study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(5), 866–877. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.5.866
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (1993). Are morphological structures computed during word recognition? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(5), 535–544. doi: 10.1007/BF01068253
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (1994). How is morphological decomposition achieved? Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(3), 369–391. doi: 10.1080/01690969408402124
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (1998). Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: Consequences for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, 61(1), 30–44. doi: 10.1006/brln.1997.1876
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (2005). Everything is psycholinguistics: Material and methodological considerations in the study of compound processing. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique, 50, 267–283. doi: 10.1017/S000841310000373X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libben, G. (2010). Compound words, semantic transparency, and morphological transcendence. Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft, 17, 317–330.
   Google Scholar
• Libben, G., Gibson, M., Yoon, Y. B., & Sandra, S. (2003). Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, 84, 50–64. doi: 10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00520-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima, S. D., & Pollatsek, A. (1983). Lexical access via an orthographic code? The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS) reconsidered. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(3), 310–332. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90215-3
   Google Scholar
• Longtin, C. M., & Meunier, F. (2005). Morphological decomposition in early visual word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 26–41. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2005.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longtin, C. M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(3), 313–334. doi: 10.1080/01690960244000036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukatela, G., Carello, C., & Turvey, M. T. (1987). Lexical representation of regular and irregular inflected nouns. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(1), 1–17. doi: 10.1080/01690968708406349
   Google Scholar
• Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2017). Explaining human performance in psycholinguistic tasks with models of semantic similarity based on prediction and counting: A review and empirical validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 57–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manelis, L., & Tharp, D. A. (1977). The processing of affixed words. Memory & Cognition, 5(6), 690–695. doi: 10.3758/BF03197417
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marelli, M., & Baroni, M. (2015). Affixation in semantic space: Modeling morpheme meanings with compositional distributional semantics. Psychological Review, 122, 485–515. doi: 10.1037/a0039267
   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, 3–33. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masson, M. E. J., & Isaak, M. I. (1999). Masked priming of words and nonwords in a naming task: Further evidence for a nonlexical basis for priming. Memory & Cognition, 27, 399–412. doi: 10.3758/BF03211536
   PubMed 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. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monsell, S. (1985). Repetition and the lexicon. In A. W. Ellis (Ed.), Progress in the psychology of language (Vol. 2, pp. 147–195). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Pastizzo, M. J., & Feldman, L. B. (2002). Discrepancies between orthographic and unrelated baselines in masked priming undermine a decompositional account of morphological facilitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(1), 244–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M. (2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-plus. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2012). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(7/8), 942–971. doi: 10.1080/01690960802069730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 507–537. doi: 10.1080/01690960050119689
   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(6), 1090–1098. doi: 10.3758/BF03196742
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shillcock, R. (1990). Lexical hypotheses in continuous speech. In G. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing (pp. 24–49). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shoolman, N., & Andrews, S. (2003). Racehorses, reindeer, and sparrows: Using masked priming to investigate morphological influences on compound word identification. In S. Kinoshita & S. J. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art (pp. 241–278). New York: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smolka, E., & Libben, G. (2017). “Can you wash off the hogwash?” – semantic transparency of first and second constituents in the processing of German compounds. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32(4), 514–531. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1256492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• StataCorp. (2014). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station: StataCorp LP.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access-via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(1), 21–39. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90544-9
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (1991). Reading and the mental lexicon. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 271–294. doi: 10.1080/01690969408402120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taft, M. (2003). Morphological representation as a correlation between form and meaning. In E. M. H. Assink & D. Sandra (Eds.), Reading complex words: Cross-language studies (pp. 113–137). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(6), 638–647. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-X
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 607–620. doi: 10.1016/0022-5371(76)90054-2
   Google Scholar
• Taft, M., & Kougious, P. (2004). The processing of morpheme-like units in monomorphemic words. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 9–16. doi: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00415-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wurm, L. (2000). Auditory processing of polymorphemic pseudo-words. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(2), 255–271. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2678
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwitserlood, P. (1994). The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(3), 341–368. doi: 10.1080/01690969408402123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwitserlood, P., Bolwiender, A., & Drews, E. (2005). Priming morphologically complex verbs by sentence contexts: Effects of semantic transparency and ambiguity. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1), 395–415. doi: 10.1080/01690960444000160
   Google Scholar