Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 369–384 | Cite as

Effects of Lexical Prosody and Word Familiarity on Lexical Access of Spoken Japanese Words

  • Takahiro Sekiguchi
Research Article


Lexical prosody (e.g., stress and pitch accent) has been shown to constrain lexical activation of spoken words in various languages. In the present study, whether or not the constraint of lexical prosody is affected by word familiarity in lexical access of Japanese words was examined using a cross-modal priming task. The stimuli were pairs of prosodically different homophones (minimal accent pairs). When the targets were more familiar members of minimal accent pairs, the responses were facilitated by prior presentations of primes that were prosodically different homophones of the targets, suggesting that lexical prosody did not constrain lexical activation. In contrast, when less familiar members of minimal accent pairs were used as the targets, the prosodically different homophones did not facilitate the responses to the targets. These results suggest that the constraint of lexical prosody is not so strong but is affected by the factor of word relative familiarity.


Lexical prosody Word familiarity Lexical access, Cross-modal priming Japanese 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beckman M.E. (1986). Stress and non-stress accent. Foris, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  2. Bond Z.S., Small L.H. (1983). Voicing, vowel, and stress mispronunciations in continuous speech. Perception & Psychophysics 34:470–474Google Scholar
  3. Connine C.M., Mullennix J., Shernoff E., Yelen J. (1990). Word familiarity and frequency in visual and auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 16:1084–1096PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cooper N., Cutler A., Wales R. (2002). Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: evidence from native and nonnative listeners. Language and Speech 45:207–228PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cutler A. (1986). Forbear is a homophone: lexical prosody does not constrain lexical access. Language and Speech 29:201–220Google Scholar
  6. Cutler A., Clifton C. (1984). The use of prosodic information in word recognition. In: Bouma H., Bouwhuis D.G. (eds) Attention and performance X: Control of language processes. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ, pp. 183–196Google Scholar
  7. Cutler A., Dahan D., Donselaar W. Van (1997). Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 40:141–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cutler A., Donselaar W. Van (2001). Voornaam is not a homophone: Lexical prosody and lexical access in Dutch. Language and Speech 44:171–195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cutler A., Otake T. (1999). Pitch accent in spoken-word recognition in Japanese. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 105:1877–1888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Donselaar W. Van., Koster M., Cutler A. (2005). Exploring the role of lexical stress in lexical recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 58A:251–273PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldinger S.D. (1998). Signal detection comparisons of phonemic and phonetic priming: The flexible-bias problem. Perception & Psychophysics 60:952–965Google Scholar
  12. Goldinger S.D., Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B. (1989). Priming lexical neighbors of spoken words: Effects of competition and inhibition. Journal of Memory and Language 28:501–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldinger S.D., Luce P.A., Pisoni D.B., Marcario J.K. (1992). Form-based priming in spoken word recognition: The roles of competition and bias. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18:1211–1238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heuven, V. J. Van (1985). Perception of stress pattern and word recognition: Recognition of Dutch words with incorrect stress position. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 78, s21.Google Scholar
  15. Kubozono H. (1993). The organization of Japanese prosody. Kurosio Publisher, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  16. Luce P.A., Goldinger S.D., Auer E.T., Vitevitch M.S. (2000). Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN. Perception & Psychophysics 62:615–625Google Scholar
  17. Marslen-Wilson W. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition 25:71–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Marslen-Wilson W. (1990). Activation, competition, and frequency in lexical access. In: Altmann G.T.M. (eds) Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 148–172Google Scholar
  19. McClelland J.L., Elman J.L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology 18:1–86CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. McQueen J.M., Norris D.G., Cutler A. (1994). Competition in spoken word recognition: Spotting words in other words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20:621–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Minematsu N., Hirose K. (1995). Roles of prosodic features in the human process of perceiving spoken words and sentences in Japanese. Journal of Acoustical Society of Japan (E) 16:311–320Google Scholar
  22. Neely J.H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In: Besner D., Humphresy G. (eds) Basic processes in reading: visual word recognition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 264–336Google Scholar
  23. Nihon Housou Kyoukai. (1985). Nihongo hatsuon akusento jiten [NHK’s dictionary of Japanese accent and pronunciation]. Tokyo: NHK. (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  24. Norris D.G. (1994). Shortlist: A connectionist model of continuous speech recognition. Cognition 52:189–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Otake T., Cutler A. (1999). Perception of suprasegmental structure in a non-native dialect. Journal of Phonetics 27:229–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Otake T., Hatano G., Cutler A., Mehler J. (1993). Mora or Syllable? Speech segmentation in Japanese. Journal of Memory and Language 32:258–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pierrehumbert J., Beckman M. (1988). Japanese tone structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Pitt M.A., Shoaf L. (2002). Revisiting bias effects in word-initial phonological priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 28:1120–1130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sekiguchi T., Nakajima Y. (1999). The use of lexical prosody for lexical access of the Japanese Language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28:439–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slowiaczek L.M. (1990). Effects of lexical stress in auditory word recognition. Language and Speech 33:47–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Soto-Faraco S., Sebastián-Gallés N., Cutler A. (2001). Segmental and suprasegmental mismatch in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language 45:412–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tabossi P. (1996). Cross-modal semantic priming. Language and Cognitive Processes 11:569–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zwitserlood P. (1989). The locus of the effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing. Cognition 32:25–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyTokyo Gakugei UniversityKoganeiJapan

Personalised recommendations