The representation of homophones: Evidence from anomia

Cognitive Neuropsychology

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 840-866

  Miozzo, Michele ^a   Jacobs, Melissa L ^a   Singer, Nicholas J W ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANOMIA; ARTICLE; BRAIN INJURY; CLINICAL OBSERVATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTATION; FEMALE; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PHONETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMANTICS; SPEECH DISORDER;

EID: 10944261258     PISSN: 02643294     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02643290342000573     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The Celex lexical database. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
2. Badecker, W. (2001). Lexical composition and the production of compounds: Evidence from errors in naming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16, 337-366.
3. Badecker, W., Miozzo, M., & Zanuttini, R. (1995). The two-stage model of lexical retrieval: Evidence from a case of anemia with selective preservation of grammatical gender. Cognition, 57, 193-216.
4. Barry, C., Morrison, C. M., & Ellis, A. W. (1997). Naming the Snodgrass & Vanderwart pictures: Effects of age of acquisition, frequency, and name agreement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 560-585.
5. Bartram, D. J. (1976). Levels of coding in picture-picture comparison task. Memory and Cognition, 4, 593-602.
6. Biederman, B., Blanken, G., & Nickels, L., (2002). The representation of homophones: Evidence from remediation. Aphasiology, 16, 1115-1136.
7. Caramazza, A. (1997). How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 177-208.
8. Caramazza, A., Bi, Y., Costa, A., & Miozzo, M. (2004). What determines the speed of lexical access: Homophone or specific-word frequency? A reply to Jescheniak et al. (2003). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 278-282.
9. Caramazza, A., Costa, A., Miozzo, M., & Bi, Y. (2001). The representation of homophones: Evidence from the frequency effect in picture naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1430-1450.
10. Caramazza, A., & Hillis, A. E. (1991). Lexical organization of nouns and verbs in the brain. Nature, 349, 788-790.
11. Caramazza, A., & Miozzo, M. (1997). The relation between syntactic and phonological knowledge in lexical access: Evidence from the "tip-of-the-tongue" phenomenon. Cognition, 64, 309-343.
12. Caramazza, A., & Miozzo, M. (1998). More is not always better: A response to Roelofs, Meyer, and Levelt. Cognition, 69, 231-241.
13. Cutting, J. C., & Ferreira, V. S. (1999). Semantic and phonological information flow in the production lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 318-344.
14. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283-321.
15. Dell, G. S. (1990). Effects of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological speech errors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 5, 313-349.
16. Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A. (1997). Lexical access in normal and aphasic speech. Psychological Review, 104, 801-838.
17. Ellis, A. W., & Morrison, C. (1998). Real age-of-acquisition effects in lexical retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 515-523.
18. Francis, N. W., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
19. Garrett, M. F. (1992). Disorders of lexical selection. Cognition, 42, 143-180.
20. Geis, M. F., & Winograd, E. (1974). Norms of semantic encoding variability for fifty homographs. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 3, 429-431.
21. Gilhooly, K. J., & Logie, R. H. (1980). Meaning-dependent ratings of imagery, age of acquisition, familiarity, and concreteness for 387 ambiguous words. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 12 428-450.
22. Goodglass, H., & Kaplan, E. (1972). The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.
23. Harley, T. A. (1999). Will one stage and no feedback suffice in lexicalization? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 45.
24. Hillis, A. E., & Caramazza, A. (1995a). Cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying visual and semantic processing: Implications from "optic aphasia." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 457-478.
25. Hillis, A., E., & Caramazza, A. (1995b). The representation of grammatical categories of words in the brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 396-407.
26. Jescheniak, J. D., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 824-843.
27. Jescheniak, J. D., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2003). Specific-word frequency is not all that counts in speech production. Some comments on Caramazza et al. (2001) and new experimental data. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 432-438.
28. Kausler, D. H., & Kollasch, S. F. (1970). Word associations to homographs. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 444-449.
29. Lambon Ralph, M. A., Graham, K. S., Ellis, A. W., & Hodges, J. R. (1998). Naming in semantic dementia: What matters? Neuropsychologia, 36, 775-784.
30. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.
31. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
32. Miozzo, M. (2003). On the processing of regular and irregular forms of verbs and nouns: Evidence from neuropsychology. Cognition, 87 101-127.
33. Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (1997). Retrieval of lexical-syntactic features in tip-of-the-tongue states. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1410-1423.
34. Miozzo, M., & Gordon, P. (2003). Facts, events, and inflection: When language and memory dissociate. Manuscript submitted for publication.
35. Morrison, C. M., Ellis, A. W., & Quinlan, P. T. (1992). Age of acquisition, not word frequency, affects object naming, not object recognition. Memory and Cognition, 20, 705-714.
36. Morton, J. (1969). Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological Review, 76, 165-178.
37. Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., Walling, J. R., & Wheeler, J. W. (1980). The University of South Florida homograph norms. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 12, 16-37.
38. Nickels, L. (2001). Spoken word production. In B. Rapp (Ed.), The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
39. Oldfield, R. C., & Wingfield, A. (1965). Response latencies in naming objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: 17 273-281.
40. Riddoch, M. J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1993). BORB Birmingham object recognition battery. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
41. Roach, A., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Grewal, R. S., & Brecher, A. (1996). The Philadelphia Naming Test: Scoring and rationale. Clinical Aphasiology, 24, 121-133.
42. Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1998). A case for the lemma/lexeme distinction in models of speaking: comment on Caramazza and Miozzo (1997). Cognition, 69, 219-230
43. Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart,M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 174-215.
44. Stemberger, J. P., & MacWhinney, B. (1986). Frequency and lexical storage of regularly and irregularly inflected forms. Memory and Cognition, 14, 17-26.
45. Twilley, L. C., Dixon, P., Taylor, D., & Clark, K. (1994). University of Alberta norms of relative meaning frequency for 566 homographs. Memory and Cognition, 22, 111-126.
46. Vigliocco, G., Antonini, T., & Garrett, M. F. (1997). Grammatical gender is on the tip of Italian tongues. Psychological Science, 8, 314-317.
47. Wingfield, A. (1967). Perceptual and response hierarchies in object identification. Acta Psychologica, 26, 216-226.
48. Zevin, J. D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002). Age of acquisition effects in word reading and other tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 1-29.
49. Zingeser, L. B., & Berndt, R. S. (1988). Grammatical class and context effects in a case of pure anomia: Implications for models of language production. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 473-516.
50. Zingeser, L. B., & Berndt, R. S. (1990). Retrieval of nouns and verbs in agrammatism and anomia. Brain and Language, 39, 14-32.