A Supralexical Model for French Derivational Morphology
Today there is a growing consensus among psycholinguists that morphological information plays a critical role in the highly automatized process of word recognition. At a linguistic level of analysis, morphology describes the word formation rules of a given language. A morphologically complex word, such as banker, represents the combination of at least two morphemes: the root bank and the suffix -er in the given example. As a consequence, from each root morpheme (e.g., bank) one can derive numerous morphologically complex words by adding another morpheme to the root (i.e., -er, -ing, -s, -rupt... to form the words banker, banking, banks, bankrupt...etc.). Thus, from a linguistic point of view, the accent is often placed on productivity when discussing the role of morphological information. Morphemic components (roots and affixes) can be used to create new word forms in production and to understand novel forms in comprehension. For example, someone who had never heard or read the word dimness before, but has knowledge of the root dim and the suffix — ness, could derive the meaning of the novel whole-word from the meaning and function of the component morphemes.
KeywordsTarget Word Word Recognition Lexical Decision Visual Word Recognition Prime Word
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Burton, A.M. (1998). In J. Grainger & A.M. Jacobs, Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical Representation. Language Production, 2, 257–295.Google Scholar
- Forster, K. I., Davis, C, Schoknecht, C, & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 211–251.Google Scholar
- Frost, R., Forster, K., & 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, 1–28.Google Scholar
- Gardes-Tamines, J. (1988). La grammaire: phonologie, morphologie, lexicologie, Tome 1. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
- Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, in press.Google Scholar
- Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2002). On the role of derivational affixes in recognizing complex words: Evidence from masked priming. Manuscript submitted for publication. Google Scholar
- Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A., M. (1998). Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Henderson, L., Wallis, J., & Knight, D. (1984). Morphemic structure and lexical access. In H. Bouma & D. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and Performance, X (pp.221–224). Hillsdale, N. J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
- Pillon, A. (1998). The pseudo-prefixation effect in visual word recognition: A true-neither strategic nor orthographic-morphemic effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 85–120.Google Scholar
- Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1995). Modelling morphological processing. In Feldman, L. B. (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing, (pp. 131–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar