Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automatic Semantic Activation for Lexical Perception: Normal and Disordered Processing

  • Chapter
Linguistics and Cognitive Neuroscience

Part of the book series: Linguistische Berichte ((LINGB))

Abstract

In everyday conversation a speaker intentionally produces a message and the hearer (or the speaker) can decide which part of the speech s/he wishes to pay attention to in order to integrate the information into some kind of higher-order belief contexts. From the viewpoint of modern psycholinguistic approaches such conscious and executive control of language processing does not relate to automatic processing mechanisms which are characteristic of components of the language processor per se. Thus, the distinction between controlled and automatic cognitive processing is fundamental to linguistics and psychology (e.g., Posner & Snyder 1975; Schneider & Shiffrin 1977). A controlled process reflects an intentional activity and seems to work serially and relatively slowly, that is, attention can be paid only to a few aspects at a time in the so-called working memory. However, a controlled process is highly dynamic and adaptable to the requirements of new task conditions. In contrast, an automatic process works reflex-like and in parallel without sharing processes with other resources. Therefore, an automatic process is quite efficient but static in nature, that is, informationally encapsulated or cognitively impenetrable. That the human’s brain develops such “wired-in” subsystems might be a matter of a genetically-driven program. This model is evidenced by specific breakdowns of mental processing when certain neurological tissues are damaged. Thus, neuropsychological evidence suggests that specific neurological substrata are responsible for informationally encapsulated automatic processing. In the case of aphasia, a specific breakdown in automatic language processing might reflect patterns of a genetic predisposition to language.

This research was supported by a fellowship of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Feodor Lynen program VB2-FLF) to the first author. He is grateful to Allen I. Selverston for his invitation to work at the University of California, San Diego, and to Elizabeth Bates, Jeffrey L. Elman and David Swinney for providing facilities in the Departments of Cognitive Science, Psychology and Linguistics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Baker, E., S.E. Blumstein & H. Goodglass (1981): “Interaction between phonological and semantic factors in auditory comprehension”. Neuropsychologia 19, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balota, D.A. & J.I. Chumbley (1985): “The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production?” Journal of Memory and Language 24, 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balota, D.A. & J.I. Chumbley (1990): “Where are the effects of frequency in visual lexical perception tasks? Right where we said they were!” Comment on Monssell, Doyle, and Haggard (1989). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 119, 231–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balota, D.A. & J.I. Chumbley (1984): “Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 10, 340–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein, S., W. Milberg & R. Shrier (1982): “Semantic processing in aphasia: evidence from an auditory lexical decision task”. Brain and Language 17, 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blutner, R. & R. Sommer (1988): “Sentence processing and lexical access: The influence of the focus-identifying task”. Journal of Memory and Language 27, 359–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, C., M.K. Tanenhaus & M.S. Seidenberg (1989): “Context and lexical access: Implications of nonword interference for lexical ambiguity resolution”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 15, 620–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterworth, B. (1989): “Lexical access in speech production”. In: W. Marslen-Wilson, ed., Lexical representation and process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterworth, B., D. Howard & P. McLoughlin (1984): “The semantic deficit in aphasia: The relationship between semantic errors in auditory comprehension and picture naming”. Neuropsychologia 22, 409–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, H.S. (1983): “Current issues in research in language comprehension”. In: R. Naremore, ed., Recent advances in language sciences. San Diego: College Hill Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, D. (1987): Neurolinguistics and linguistics aphasiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caramazza, A., R.S. Berndt & H.H. Brownell (1982): “The semantic deficit hypothesis: Perceptual parsing and object classification by aphasic patients”. Brain and Language 15, 161–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caramazza, A. & M. McCloskey (1988): “The case of single patient studies”. Cognitive Neuropsychology 5, 517–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenery, H.J., J.C.L. Ingram & B.E. Murdoch (1990): “Automatic and volitional semantic processing in aphasia”. Brain and Language 38, 215–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, C. (1974): “Context effects in sentence comprehension: A study of the subjective lexicon”. Memory & Cognition 2, 130–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G.S. (1986): “A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production”. Psychological Review 93, 283–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeRenzi, E. & L.A. Vignolo (1962): “The Token Test: A sensitive test to detect receptive disturbances in aphasics”. Brain 85, 556–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischler, I. (1977): “Associative facilitation without expectancy in a lexical decision task”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 3, 18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flores d’Arcais, G.B. (1988): “Automatic processes on language comprehension”. In: G. Denes, C. Semenza & P. Bisiacchi, eds., Perspectives on cognitive neuropsychology. Hillsdale NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J.A. (1983): The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K.I. (1976): “Accessing the mental lexicon”. In: R.J. Wales & E.C.T. Walker, eds., New approaches to language mechanisms. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K.I. (1979): “Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor”. In: W.E. Cooper & E.C.T. Walker, eds., Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster, K.I. (1989): “Basic issues in lexical processing”. In: W.D. Marslen-Wilson, ed., Lexical representation and process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, D.J. & J.R. Ross (1983): “Great expectations: Context effects during sentence processing”. In: G.B. Flores d’Arcais & R.J. Jarvella, eds., The process of language understanding. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A.D. (1988): “Autonomy and automaticity: Accessing function words during sentence comprehension”. In: G. Denes, C. Semenza & P. Bisiacchi, eds., Perspectives on cognitive neuropsychology. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A.D. (1983): “Children’s sensitivity to function words during sentence comprehension”. Linguistics 21, 717–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gainotti, G. (1976): “The relationship between semantic impairment in comprehension and naming in aphasic patients”. British Journal of Disorders of Communication 11, 57–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gainotti, G., C. Caltagirone & A. Ibba (1975): “Semantic and phonemic aspects of auditory comprehension in aphasia”. Linguistics 154 /155, 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gainotti, G., G. Micheli, M.C. Silveri & C. Masullo (1981): “The relationship, between type of naming error and semantic-lexical discrimination in aphasic patients”. Cortex 17, 401–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, M. (1992): “Disorders of lexical selection”. Cognition 42, 143–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerrig, R. (1986): “Process and products of lexical access”. Language and Cognitive Processes 1, 187–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerwirth, L.R., A.G. Shindler & D.B. Hier (1984): “Altered patterns of word associations in dementia and aphasia”. Brain and Language 21, 307–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glucksberg, S., R.J. Kreuz & S.H. Rho (1986): “Context can constrain lexical access: Implications for models of language comprehension”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 12, 323–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodglass, H. & L. Menn (1985): “Is agrammatism an unitary phenomenon?” In: M.L. Kean, ed., Agrammatism. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodglass, H. & E. Baker (1976): “Semantic field, naming, and auditory comprehension in aphasia”. Brain and Language 3, 359–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosjean, F. (1980): “Spoken lexical perception processes and the gating paradigm”. Perception & Psychophysics 28, 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagoort, P. (1993): “Impairments of lexical-semantic processing in aphasia: Evidence from the processing of lexical ambiguities”. Brain and Language 45, 189–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hakes, D.T. (1972): “Effects of reducing complement constructions on sentence comprehension”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11, 278–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, D. (1990): Sprachprozesse und Wissensstrukturen. Neuropsychologische Grundlagen der Kognition. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, D. (1992): “Lexical semantics and aphasia: A state-of-the-art review”. Neurolinguistics 7 (1/2), 23–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, D. (1993): “Semantische Einträge und Konzeptuelle Wissensstrukturen: Psycho-und neurolinguistische Evidenz”. Linguistische Berichte 145, 204–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, D. (1994): The temporal course of semantic access in aphasia: Some explanations. TENNET V, Montréal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillert, D. (1995): “Linguistics & Cognitive Neuroscience”. (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogaboam, T.W. & C.A. Perfetti (1975): “Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension: The common sense effect”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14, 265–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howes, D. (1964): “Application of the word-frequency concept to aphasia”. In: K. Salzinger & S. Salzinger, ed., Research in verbal behavior and some neuropsychological implications. NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howes, D. (1967): “Some experimental investigation of language in aphasia”. In: K. Salzinger & S. Salzinger, ed., Research in verbal behavior and some neurophysiological implications. NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakimik, J.A. (1980): The interaction of sound and knowledge in lexical perception from fluent speech. Carnegie-Mellon University: dissertation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983): Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J.L. (1989): “Multiple access of homonym meanings: an artifact of backward priming?” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18 (4), 417–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, W.F. (1988): “Note, An investigation of lexical ambiguity in Broca’s aphasics using an auditory lexical proming technique”. Neuropsychologia 26 (5), 747–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempen, G. & P. Huijbers (1983): “The lexicalization process in sentence production and naming: Indirect selection of words”. Cognition 14, 185–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiger, J.I. & A.L. Glass (1983): “The facilitation of lexical decisions by a prime occurring after the target”. Memory & Cognition 11, 356–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (1981): “Semantic facilitation in lexical decision as a function of prime-target association”. Memory & Cognition 9, 587–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, R. (1978): Linguistic investigations of aphasia. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W.J.M. (1989): Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W.J.M. (1992): “Accessing words in speech production: Stages, processes and representations”. Cognition 42, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, D.G. (1973): “Aspects of the theory of comprehension, memory and attention”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 25, 22–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. & L.K. Tyler (1980): “The temporal structure of spoken language understanding”. Cognition 8, 1–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. & L.K. Tyler (1987): “Against modularity”. In: J.L. Garfield, ed., Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. & A. Welsh (1978): “Processing interactions and lexical access during word-recognition in continuous speech”. Cognitive Psychology 10, 29–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. (1984): “Function and process in spoken word-recognition”. In: H. Bouma & D.G. Bouwhuis, eds., Attention and Performance X: Control of language processes. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. (1985): “Speech shadowing and speech comprehension”. Speech Communication 4, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W.D. (1987): “Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition”. Cognition 25, 71–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R.C. (1987): “Articulatory and phonological deficit in short-term memory and their relation to syntactic processing”. Brain and Language 32, 159–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, J.L. & J. Elman (1986): “The TRACE model of speech perception”. Cognitive Psychology 18, 1–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, J.L. & D.E. Rummelhart (1981): “An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings”. Psychological Review 88, 375–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehler, J., J. Segui & P.W. Carey (1978): “Tails of words: Monitoring ambiguity”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17, 29–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D.E. & R.W. Schvaneveldt (1971): “Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations”. Journal of Experimental Psychology 90, 227–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milberg, W. & S. Blumstein (1981): “Lexical decision and aphasia: Evidence for semantic processing”. Brain and Language 14, 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milberg, W, S. Blumstein & B. Dworetzky (1987): “Processing of lexical ambiguities in aphasia”. Brain and Language 31, 138–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, J. & J. Long (1976): “Effect of word transitional probability on phoneme identification”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12, 431–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, J. (1969): “Interaction of information in lexical perception”. Psychological Review 76, 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, J. (1979): “Lexical perception”. In: J. Morton & J.C. Marshall, eds., Psycholinguistic series 2: Structures and processes. London: Elek.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, H.E. & W.D. Marslen-Wilson (1993): “Access to word meanings during spoken language comprehension: Effects of sentential semantic context”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19 (6), 1254–1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely, J.H. (1977): “Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention!” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 106, 226–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely, J.H. (1990): “Semantic priming effects in visual lexical perception. A selective review of current findings and theories”. In: D. Besner & G. Humphreys, eds., Basic processes in reading: Visual lexical perception. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. (1986): “Lexical perception: Context effects without priming”. Cognition 22, 93–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oden, G.C. & J.L. Spira (1983): “Influence of context on the activation and selection of ambiguous word senses”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 35A, 51–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onifer, W. & D.A. Swinney (1981): “Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias”. Cognition 9, 225–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrin, R.K. & M.F. Schwarz (1986): “Reconstructing from a degraded trace: A study of sentence repetition in agrammatism”. Brain and Language 28, 328–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrin, R.K. & L.K. Tyler (1993): “Automatic access to lexical semantics in aphasia: Evidence from semantic and associative priming”. Brain and Language 45, 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M.I. & C.R.R. Snyder (1975): “Attention and cognitive control”. In: R. Solso, ed., Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prather, P.A. & D.A. Swinney (1988): “Lexical processing and ambiguity resolution: An autonomous process in an interactive box”. In: S.L. Small, G.W. Cottrell & M.K. Tanenhaus, eds., Lexical ambiguity resolution: Perspectives from psycholinguistics, neuropsychology and artificial intelligence. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prather, P.A., E. Zurif, C. Stern & T.J. Rosen (1992): “Slowed lexical access in nonfluent aphasia: A case study”. Brain and Language 43, 336–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinnert, C. & H.A. Whitaker (1973): “Semantic confusions by aphasic patients”. Cortex 9, 56–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saffran, E.M. & O.S.M. Marin (1975): “Immediate memory for word lists and sentences in a patient with a deficient auditory short-term memory”. Brain and Language 2, 420–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W. & R.M. Shiffrin (1977): “Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search and attention”. Psychology Review 8, 1–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schvaneveldt, R.W., D.E. Meyer & C.A. Becker (1976): “Lexical ambiguity, semantic context, and visual lexical perception”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2, 243–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwanenflugel, P. & K. LaCount (1988): “Semantic relatedness and the scope of facilitation for upcoming words in sentences”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 14, 344–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwanenflugel, P. & E. Shoben (1985): “The influence of sentence constraint on the scope of facilitation for upcoming words”. Journal of Memory and Language 24, 232–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M.S. & M.K. Tanenhaus (1986): “Modularity and lexical access”. In: I. Gopnik, ed., From models to modules: Proceedings of the McGill Cognitive Science Workshop. NJ: Ablex Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M.S. (1985): “The time course of information activation and utilization in visual lexical perception”. In: D. Besner, T.G. Wasller & G.E. MacKinon, eds., Reading research: Advances in theory and practice, Vol. 5. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M.S., M.K. Tanenhaus, J.M. Leimann & M. Bienkowski (1982): “Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing”. Cognitive Psychology 14, 489–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenberg, M.S., G.S. Waters, M. Sanders & P. Langer (1984): “Pre-and postlexical loci of contextual effects on lexical perception”. Memory & Cognition 12, 315–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffrin, R.M. & W. Schneider (1977): “Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and ageneral theory”. Psychology Review 84, 127–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, G.B. (1981): “Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of lexical perception”. Psychological Bulletin 96, 316–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stemberger, J.P. (1983): “Inflectional malapropisms: Form-based errors in English morphology”. Linguistics 21, 573–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, C., P. Prather, D.A. Swinney & E. Zurif (1991): “The time course of automatic lexical access and aging”. Brain and Language 40, 359–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinney, D.A. & D.T. Hakes (1976): “Effects of prior context upon lexical access during sentence comprehension”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 15, 681–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinney, D.A. (1979): “Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18, 645–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinney, D.A., W. Onifer, P. Prather & M. Hirshkowitz (1979): “Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences”. Memory & Cognition 7, 165–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinney, D.A., E. Zurif & J. Nicol (1989): “The effects of focal brain damage on sentence processing: An examination of the neurological organization of a mental modul”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1 (1), 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P. (1988a): “Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of contexts”. Journal of Memory and Language 27, 324–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P. (1988b): “Effects of context on the immediate interpretation of unambiguous words”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 14, 153–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabossi, P., L. Colombo & R. Job (1987): “Accessing lexical ambiguity: Effects of context and dominance”. Psychological Research 49, 161–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M.K. & M.M. Lucas (1987): “Context effects in lexical processing”. Cognition 25, 213–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M.K., C. Burgess & M. Seidenberg (1988): “Is multiple access an artifact of backward priming?” In: S.L. Small, G.W. Cotrell & M.K. Tanenhaus, eds., Lexical ambiguity resolution. San Maeto, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M.K., G.N. Carlson & M. Seidenberg (1985): “Do listeners compute linguistic representations?” In: D.R. Dowty, L. Kartunnen & A.M. Zwicky, ed., Natural language parsing: Psycholinguistic, theoretical and computational perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M.K., G.S. Dell & G. Carlson (1987): “Context effects in lexical processing: A connectionist approach to modularity”. In: J.L. Garfield, ed., Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M.K., J.M. Leiman & M. Seidenberg (1979): “Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18, 427–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A.M. (1960): “Contextual cues in selective listening”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 12, 242–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, L.K. (1988): Spoken Language Comprehension. An experimental approach to disordered and normal processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, L.K. & U.H. Frauenfelder (1987): “The process of spoken lexical perception: An introduction”. In: U.H. Frauenfelder & L.K. Tyler, eds., Spoken lexical perception. A Cognition special issue. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J.N. (1988): “Constraints upon semantic activation during sentence comprehension”. Language and Cognitive Processes 3 (3), 165–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (1907): Outlines of psychology. London: Williams & Norgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwitserlood, P. (1989): “The locus of the effects of sentential-semantic context in spoken-word processing”. Cognition 32, 25–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Manchester, UK

    Dieter Hillert, Douglas F. H. Burrington & Gautam A. Gupta

Authors
  1. Dieter Hillert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Douglas F. H. Burrington
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gautam A. Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Science and Technology, Centre for Computational Linguistics, University of Manchester, P.O. Box 88, M60 1QD, Manchester, UK

    Dieter Hillert

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1994 Westdeutscher Verlag GmbH, Opladen

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hillert, D., Burrington, D.F.H., Gupta, G.A. (1994). Automatic Semantic Activation for Lexical Perception: Normal and Disordered Processing. In: Hillert, D. (eds) Linguistics and Cognitive Neuroscience. Linguistische Berichte. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-91649-5_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-91649-5_14

  • Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-531-12600-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-322-91649-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation