Context effects and the processing of spoken homophones

Reading and Writing

Volumn 10, Issue 3-5, 1998, Pages 223-243

  Ping, L I ^a   Yip, Michael C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND   (United States)

^b CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Context effects; Gating paradigm; Interactive activation models; Multiple constraints; Processing chinese homophones

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040542772     PISSN: 09224777     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M. & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 25: 257-271.
2. Cotton, S. & Grosjean, F. (1984). The gating paradigm: A comparison of successive and individual presentation formats, Perception and Psychophysics 35: 41-48.
3. Fodor, J.A. (1983). The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4. Forster, K. (1981). Priming and the effects of sentence and lexical contexts on naming time: Evidence for autonomous lexical processing, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 33: 465-4195.
5. Grosjean, F. (1980). Spoken word recognition processes and the gating paradigm, Perception and Psychophysics 28: 267-283.
6. Grosjean, F. (1988). Exploring the recognition of guest words in bilingual speech, Language and Cognitive Processes 3: 233-274.
7. Grosjean, F., Dommergues, J., Cornu, E., Guillelmon, D. & Besson, C. (1994). The gendermarking effect in spoken word recognition, Perception and Psychophysics 56: 590-598.
8. Ho, K. (1992). Cantonese frequent words pronunciation dictionary. Chinese Division, Institute of Education in Eanguage, Hong Kong Education Department.
9. Institute of Einguistics, The Academy of Social Sciences (1985). Xianda Hanyu Cidian [Modern Chinese Dictionary]. Beijing: Commercial Press.
10. Kawamoto, A.H. (1993). Non-linear dynamics in the resolution of lexical ambiguity: A parallel distributed processing account, Journal of Memory and Language 32: 474-516.
11. Li, P. (1994). Understanding the time course of sentence comprehension: A sentence gating study in Mandarin Chinese. In Chang, H-W., Huang, J-T., Hue, W. & Tzeng, O. (eds.), Advances in the study of Chinese language processing, Vol. 1 (pp. 303-323). Taipei: National Taiwan University Press.
12. Li, P. (1996a). The temporal structure of spoken sentence comprehension in Chinese, Perception and Psychophysics 58: 571-586.
13. Li, P. (1996b). Spoken word recognition of code-switched words by Chinese-English bilinguals, Journal of Memory and Language 35: 757-774.
14. Li, P. (1998). Crosslinguistic variation and sentence processing: The case of Chinese. In D. Hillert (ed.), Sentence processing: A cross-linguistic perspective. San Diego, CA: Academic Press (in press).
15. Li, P., Bates, E. & MacWhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflections: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese, Journal of Memory and Language 32: 169-192.
16. Li, P. & Yip, M. (1996). Lexical ambiguity and context effects in spoken word recognition: Lvidence from Chinese. In G. Cottrell (ed.), Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 228-232). Hillsdale, NJ: Lrlbaum.
17. The Linguistic Society of Hong Kong (1994). The LSHK Cantonese Romanization Scheme, Jyutping. LSHK Newsletter, No. 17.
18. Marslen-Wilson, W. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition, Cognition 25: 71-102.
19. Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the Lnglish mental lexicon, Psychological Review 101: 3-33.
20. Marslen-Wilson, W. D. & Welsh, A. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech, Cognitive Psychology 10: 29-63.
21. McClelland, J.L. (1987). The case for interactionism in language processing. In M. Coltheart (ed.), Attention and performance Vol. 12: The psychology of reading (pp. 3-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lrlbaum.
22. McClelland, J.L. & Llman, J. (1986). Interactive processes in speech perception: The TRACL model. In: McClelland, J.L., Rumelhart, D.L. & the POP Research Group (eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, Vol. 2 (pp. 58-121). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
23. Onifer, W. & Swinney, D.A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Lffects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias, Memory & Cognition 9: 225-236.
24. Rumelhart, D., McClelland, J. & the POP Research Group (1986). Parallel distributed processing; Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, Vol. 1, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
25. Seidenberg, M.S., Tanenhaus, M.J., Leiman, J.M. & Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledgebased processing, Cognitive Psychology 14: 538-559.
26. Simpson, G. (1981). Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20: 120-136.
27. Simpson, G.B. & Krueger, M.A. (1991). Selective access of homograph meanings in sentence context, Journal of Memory and Language 30: 627-643.
28. Small, S., Cottrell, G. & Tanenhaus, M. (1988). Lexical ambiguity resolution: perspectives from psycholinguistics, neuropsychology, and artificial intelligence. San Mateao, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
29. Swinney, D.A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18: 645-659.
30. Tabossi, P. (1988). Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts, Journal of Memory and Language 27: 324-340.
31. Tyler, L. & Wessels, J. (1985). Is gating an on-line task? Lvidence from naming latency data, Perception and Psychophysics 38: 217-222.