The Interaction Between Storage and Computation in Morphosyntactic Processing

Chapter
Part of the Innovations in Cognitive Neuroscience book series (Innovations Cogn.Neuroscience)

Abstract

The term morphology derives from the Greek word “morphe” meaning “form,” and is generally used to refer to the study of the physical forms of entities in many scientific disciplines. In linguistics and psycholinguistics, morphology is the study of the internal structure of words which are the linguistic units that provide the main mapping between form and meaning. Word recognition has had a long and distinguished history in psycholinguistics, yet few models of lexical processing have included morphology as a level of linguistic representation. This may be because despite the ubiquity of multi-morphemic words, many current models of visual word recognition have been developed to model the mapping of orthography and phonology onto semantics—and thus have focused on morphologically simple words. Expanding the focus of research to include multi-morphemic words will significantly advance our understanding of reading by allowing us to evaluate the contribution of morphological analysis to the process of word recognition.

Keywords

Morphological processing Word recognition Single vs. dual mechanism models M170 N400 P600 event related potentials 

References

  1. Allen, M., & Badecker, W. (2002a). Inflectional regularity: Probing the nature of lexical representation in a cross-modal priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 705–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, M., & Badecker, W. (2002b). Stem homographs and lemma level representations. Brain and Language, 81, 79–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aronoff, M. (1983). A decade of morphology and word formation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 12, 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aronoff, M., & Fudeman, K. (2010). What is morphology?: Fundamentals of linguistics (1st ed.). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. 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, 94–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barber, H., Dominguez, A., & de Vega, M. (2002). Human brain potentials indicate morphological decomposition in visual word recognition. Neuroscience Letters, 318, 149–152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beretta, A., Campbell, C., Carr, T. H., Huang, J., Schmitt, L. M., Christianson, K., & Cao, Y. (2003). An ERfMRI investigation of morphological inflection in German reveals that the brain makes a distinction between regular and irregular forms. Brain and Language, 85, 67–92.Google Scholar
  8. Bentin, S., & Feldman, L. (1990). The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to repetition priming at short and long lags: Evidence from hebrew. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 42, 693–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bentin, S., & Frost, R. (1995). Morphological factors in visual word identification in Hebrew. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 271–292). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  10. Bertram, R., Baayen, R. H., & Schreuder, R. (2000). Effects of family size for complex words. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 390–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2001). Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon. Cognition, 81, 65–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2005). Discontinuous morphology in time: Incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language & Cognitive Processes, 20, 207–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bozic, M., Tyler, L. K., Ives, D. T., Randall, B., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2010). Bihemispheric foundations for human speech comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 17439–17444.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bozic, M., Tyler, L. K., Su, L., Wingfield, C., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2013). Neurobiological systems for lexical representation and analysis in English. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 1678–1691.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burani, C., & Caramazza, A. (1987). Representation and processing of derived words. Language & Cognitive Processes, 2, 217–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production: Development, writing and other language processes (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: Academic.Google Scholar
  17. Caramazza, A., Laudanna, A., & Romani, C. (1988). Lexical access and inflectional morphology. Cognition, 28, 297–332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  19. Clahsen, H. (2003). Derivational morphology in the German mental lexicon: A dual mechanism account. In H. Clahsen, I. Sonnenstuhl, & J. P. Blevins (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing (Vol. 151, p. 125).Google Scholar
  20. Colé, P., Beauvillain, C., & Segui, J. (1989). On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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, 83–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Diependaele, K., Grainger, J., & Sandra, D. (2012). Derivational morphology and skilled reading. In The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 311–332). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Diependaele, K., Morris, J., Serota, R. M., Bertrand, D., & Grainger, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Letter transpositions and morphological processing. Language & Cognitive Processes, 28, 988–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2005). Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition. Language & Cognitive Processes, 20, 75–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2009). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition, 37, 895–908. doi: 10.3758/mc.37.6.895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dominguez, A., De Vega, M., & Barber, H. (2004). Event-related brain potentials elicited by morphological, homographic, orthographic, and semantic priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 598–608.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dominguez, A., Segui, J., & Cuetos, F. (2002). The time-course of inflexional morphological priming. Linguistics, 40, 235–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Drews, E., & Zwitserlood, P. (1995). Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 1098.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Elman, J. L. (2004). An alternative view of the mental lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 301–306.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Feldman, L. B., & Bentin, S. (1994). Morphological analysis of disrupted morphemes: Evidence from Hebrew. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 407–435.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Feldman, L. B., & Moskovljević, J. (1987). Repetition priming is not purely episodic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 573.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & del Prado Martín, F. M. (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, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Feldman, L. B., & Soltano, E. G. (1999). Morphological priming: The role of prime duration, semantic transparency, and affix position. Brain and Language, 68, 33–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Forster, K. I. (2009). The intervenor effect in masked priming: How does masked priming survive across an intervening word? Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Forster, K. I., & Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680.Google Scholar
  38. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fowler, C. A., Napps, S. E., & Feldman, L. (1985). Relations among regular and irregular morphologically related words in the lexicon as revealed by repetition priming. Memory & Cognition, 13, 241–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Frauenfelder, U. H., & Schreuder, R. (1992). Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991 (pp. 165–183). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Friederici, A. D. (1995). The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: A model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain and Language, 50, 259–281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. I. (2000a). Decomposing morphologically complex words in a nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(3), 751–765.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2000b). Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 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.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Garnsey, S. M. (1993). Event-related brain potentials in the study of language: An introduction. Language & Cognitive Processes, 8, 337–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2000). Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming. Language & Cognitive Processes, 15, 421–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 127–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gold, B. T., & Rastle, K. (2007). Neural correlates of morphological decomposition during visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1983–1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Grainger, J., Colé, P., & Segui, J. (1991). Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 370–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Grainger, J., Holcomb, P., Cornelissen, P., & Hansen, P. (2010). Neural constraints on a functional architecture for word recognition. In P. Cornelissen, P. Hansen, M. Kringelbach & K. Pugh (Eds.), The neural basis of reading (pp. 3–32). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Watching the word go by: On the time-course of component processes in visual word recognition. Lang & Ling Compass, 3, 128–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1999). Temporal integration of information in orthographic priming. Visual Cognition, 6, 461–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Grainger, J., Kiyonaga, K., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). The time course of orthographic and phonological code activation. Psychological Science, 17, 1021–1026.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Grainger, J., & Segui, J. (1990). Neighborhood frequency effects in visual word recognition: A comparison of lexical decision and masked identification latencies. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 47, 191–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hagoort, P., Brown, C., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language & Cognitive Processes, 8, 439–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1994). Some key features of distributed morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 21, 88.Google Scholar
  58. Harris, T., Wexler, K., & Holcomb, P. (2000). An ERP investigation of binding and conference. Brain and Language, 75, 313–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Holcomb, P. J., & Grainger, J. (2006). On the time course of visual word recognition: An event-related potential investigation using masked repetition priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1631–1643.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jaeger, J. J., Lockwood, A. H., Kemmerer, D. L., Van Valin Jr, R. D., Murphy, B. W., & Khalak, H. G. (1996). A positron emission tomographic study of regular and irregular verb morphology in English. Language, 72, 451–497.Google Scholar
  61. Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language & Cognitive Processes, 15, 159–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kaan, E., & Swaab, T. Y. (2003). Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 98–110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kempley, S. T., & Morton, J. (1982). The effects of priming with regularly and irregularly related words in auditory word recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 73, 441–454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kielar, A., & Joanisse, M. F. (2010). Graded effects of regularity in language revealed by N400 indices of morphological priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 1373–1398.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kielar, A., & Joanisse, M. F. (2011). The role of semantic and phonological factors in word recognition: An ERP cross-modal priming study of derivational morphology. Neuropsychologia, 49, 161–177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kielar, A., Joanisse, M. F., & Hare, M. L. (2008). Priming English past tense verbs: Rules or statistics? Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Laudanna, A., Badecker, W., & Caramazza, A. (1989). Priming homographic stems. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 531–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Laudanna, A., Badecker, W., & Caramazza, A. (1992). Processing inflectional and derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 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 Associates.Google Scholar
  70. Lavric, A., Clapp, A., & Rastle, K. (2007). ERP evidence of morphological analysis from orthography: A masked priming study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 866–877.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lavric, A., Elchlepp, H., & Rastle, K. (2012). Tracking hierarchical processing in morphological decomposition with brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 811–816.Google Scholar
  72. Lavric, A., Rastle, K., & Clapp, A. (2011). What do fully visible primes and brain potentials reveal about morphological decomposition? Psychophysiology, 48, 676–686.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lehtonen, M., Cunillera, T., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., Hultén, A., Tuomainen, J., & Laine, M. (2007). Recognition of morphologically complex words in Finnish: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1148, 123–137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lehtonen, M., Monahan, P. J., & Poeppel, D. (2011). Evidence for early morphological decomposition: Combining masked priming with magnetoencephalography. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 3366–3379.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Levelt, W. J. (1993). Speaking: From intention to articulation (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  76. Lewis, G., Solomyak, O., & Marantz, A. (2011). The neural basis of obligatory decomposition of suffixed words. Brain and Language, 118, 118–127.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Longtin, C.-M., & Meunier, F. (2005). Morphological decomposition in early visual word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language & Cognitive Processes, 18, 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  80. Manelis, L., & Tharp, D. A. (1977). The processing of affixed words. Memory & Cognition, 5, 690–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Marantz, A. (2013). No escape from morphemes in morphological processing. Language & Cognitive Processes, 28, 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101, 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. McCormick, S. F., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Is there a ‘fete’in ‘fetish’? Effects of orthographic opacity on morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 307–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. McKinnon, R. (1996). Constraints on movement phenomena in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Language & Cognitive Processes, 11, 495–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Meunier, F., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2004). Regularity and irregularity in Frenchverbal inflection. Language & Cognitive Processes, 19, 561–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Meunier, F., & Segui, J. (1999). Frequency effects in auditory word recognition: The case of suffixed words. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 327–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Miceli, G., Turriziani, P., Caltagirone, C., Capasso, R., Tomaiuolo, F., & Caramazza, A. (2002). The neural correlates of grammatical gender: An fMRI investigation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 618–628.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Morris, J., Frank, T., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2007). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: An ERP investigation. Psychophysiology, 44, 506–521.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Morris, J., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2008). An electrophysiological investigation of early effects of masked morphological priming. Language & Cognitive Processes, 23, 1021–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Morris, J., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2013). Tracking the consequences of morpho-orthographic decomposition using ERPs. Brain Research, 1529, 92–104.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Morris, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2005). Event-related potentials to violations of inflectional verb morphology in English. Cognitive Brain Research, 25, 963–981.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Morris, J., Porter, J. H., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). Effects of lexical status and morphological complexity in masked priming: An ERP study. Language & Cognitive Processes, 26, 558–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Morris, J., & Stockall, L. (2012). Early, equivalent ERP masked priming effects for regular and irregular morphology. Brain and Language, 123, 81–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Münte, T. F., Say, T., Clahsen, H., Schiltz, K., & Kutas, M. (1999). Decomposition of morphologically complex words in English: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 241–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Murrell, G. A., & Morton, J. (1974). Word recognition and morphemic structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Napps, S. E. (1989). Morphemic relationships in the lexicon: Are they distinct from semantic and formal relationships? Memory & Cognition, 17, 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Neville, H., Nicol, J. L., Barss, A., Forster, K. I., & Garrett, M. F. (1991). Syntactically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 151–165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Orsolini, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1997). Universals in morphological representation: Evidence from Italian. Language & Cognitive Processes, 12, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Osterhout, L. (1997). On the brain response to syntactic anomalies: Manipulations of word position and word class reveal individual differences. Brain and Language, 59, 494–522.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 786–803.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 739–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 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, 244–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Pastizzo, M. J., & Feldman, L. B. (2004). Morphological processing: A comparison between free and bound stem facilitation. Brain and Language, 90, 31–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Penke, M., Weyerts, H., Gross, M., Zander, E., Münte, T. F., & Clahsen, H. (1997). How the brain processes complex words: An event-related potential study of German verb inflections. Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 37–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of language. Science, 253, 530–535.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Pinker, S. (1997). Words and rules in the human brain. Nature, 387, 547.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 456–463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Plunkett, K., & Juola, P. (1999). A connectionist model of English past tense and plural morphology. Cognitive Science, 23, 463–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Plunkett, K., & Marchman, V. (1993). From rote learning to system building: Acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets. Cognition, 48, 21–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Prasada, S., & Pinker, S. (1993). Generalisation of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language & Cognitive Processes, 8, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language & Cognitive Processes, 23, 942–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 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 & Cognitive Processes, 15, 507–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Raveh, M. (2002). The contribution of frequency and semantic similarity to morphological processing. Brain and Language, 81, 312–325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Raveh, M., & Rueckl, J. G. (2000). Equivalent effects of inflected and derived primes: Long-term morphological priming in fragment completion and lexical decision. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 103–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Rayner, K., White, S. J., Johnson, R. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2006). Raeding wrods with jubmled lettres there is a cost. Psychological Science, 17, 192–193.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Clahsen, H., Lleó, C., Zaake, W., & Münte, T. F. (2001). Event-related brain responses to morphological violations in Catalan. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 47–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Münte, T. F., & Clahsen, H. (2002). Morphological priming in Spanish verb forms: An ERP repetition priming study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 443–454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Rösler, F., Pütz, P., Friederici, A., & Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related brain potentials while encountering semantic and syntactic constraint violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 345–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Rubin, G. S., Becker, C. A., & Freeman, R. H. (1979). Morphological structure and its effect on visual word recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 757–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Rueckl, J. G., Mikolinski, M., Raveh, M., Miner, C. S., & Mars, F. (1997). Morphological priming, fragment completion, and connectionist networks. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 382–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Rueckl, J. G., & Raveh, M. (1999). The influence of morphological regularities on the dynamics of a connectionist network. Brain and Language, 68, 110–117.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing, Psychological and biological models (Vol. 2, pp. 216–271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  125. Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1994). Prefix stripping re-revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1995). Modeling morphological processing. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 131–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc..Google Scholar
  127. Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1997). How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 118–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Seidenberg, M. S., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 353–361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Solomyak, O., & Marantz, A. (2009). Lexical access in early stages of visual word processing: A single-trial correlational MEG study of heteronym recognition. Brain and Language, 108, 191–196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Solomyak, O., & Marantz, A. (2010). Evidence for early morphological decomposition in visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2042–2057.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Sonnenstuhl, I., Eisenbeiss, S., & Clahsen, H. (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition, 72, 203–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Stanners, R. F., Neiser, J. J., Hernon, W. P., & Hall, R. (1979). Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Stockall, L., & Marantz, A. (2006). A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: MEG evidence. The Mental Lexicon, 1, 85–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Taft, M. (1979a). Lexical access-via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Taft, M. (1979b). Recognition of affixed words and the word frequency effect. Memory & Cognition, 7, 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Taft, M. (1988). A morphological-decomposition model of lexical representation. Linguistics, 26, 657–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language & Cognitive Processes, 9, 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Tyler, L. K., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2005b). Differentiating lexical form, meaning, and structure in the neural language system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 8375–8380.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Tyler, L. K., Stamatakis, E. A., Post, B., Randall, B., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2005a). Temporal and frontal systems in speech comprehension: An fMRI study of past tense processing. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1963–1974.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Ullman, M. T. (2001). A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 717–726.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231–270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Ullman, M. T., Corkin, S., Coppola, M., Hickok, G., Growdon, J. H., Koroshetz, W. J., et al. (1997). A neural dissociation within language: Evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 266–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Van Heuven, W. J., Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Schriefers, H. (2001). Shared neighborhood effects in masked orthographic priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 96–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Vannest, J., Bertram, R., Järvikivi, J., & Niemi, J. (2002). Counterintuitive cross-linguistic differences: More morphological computation in English than in Finnish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 83–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Vannest, J., & Boland, J. E. (1999). Lexical morphology and lexical access. Brain and Language, 68, 324–332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Vannest, J., Polk, T. A., & Lewis, R. L. (2005). Dual-route processing of complex words: New fMRI evidence from derivational suffixation. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. De Vincenzi, M., Job, R., Di Matteo, R., Angrilli, A., Penolazzi, B., Ciccarelli, L., et al. (2003). Differences in the perception and time course of syntactic and semantic violations. Brain and Language, 85, 280–296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Voga, M., & Grainger, J. (2004). Masked morphological priming with varying levels of form overlap: Evidence from Greek verbs. Current Psychology Letters: Behaviour, Brain & Cognition, 13(2).Google Scholar
  150. Weyerts, H., Münte, T. F., Smid, H. G., & Heinze, H.-J. (1996). Mental representations of morphologically complex words: An event-related potential study with adult humans. Neuroscience Letters, 206, 125–128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Zweig, E., & Pylkkänen, L. (2009). A visual M170 effect of morphological complexity. Language & Cognitive Processes, 24, 412–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Zwitserlood, P., Bolwiender, A., & Drews, E. (2005). Priming morphologically complex verbs by sentence contexts: Effects of semantic transparency and ambiguity. Language & Cognitive Processes, 20, 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Cognitive ScienceHampshire CollegeAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations