Modality effects in compounding with English inflectional morphology

British Journal of Psychology

Volumn 96, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 295-311

  Hayes, Jennifer A ^a   Smith, Pamela M ^b   Murphy, Victoria A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD; FEMALE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PRESCHOOL CHILD; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED;

EID: 23844465519     PISSN: 20448295     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/000712605X48962     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Alegre, M. A., & Gordon, P. (1996). Red rats eater exposes recursion in children's word formation. Cognition, 60, 65-82.
2. Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of a cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369-406.
3. Blaxton, T. A. (1989). Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer appropriate processing framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 657-668.
4. Bonin, P., Fayol, M., & Gombert, J. (1998). Experimental study of lexical access in the writing and naming of isolated words. International Journal of Psychology, 33, 269-286.
5. Buck-Gengler, C. J., Menn, L., & Healy, A. F. (2004). What mice trap tells us about the mental lexicon. Brain and Language, 1-3, 453-464.
6. Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 425-455.
7. Ellis, N.C., & Schmidt, R. (1997). Morphology and longer distance dependencies: Laboratory research illustrating the A is SLA. Studies in second language acquisition, 19, 145-171.
8. Gordon, P. (1985). Level-ordering in lexical development. Cognition, 21, 73-93.
9. Haskell, T. R., MacDonald, M. C., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2003). Language learning and innateness: Some implications of compounds research. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 119-163.
10. Hayes, J. A., Murphy, V. A., Davey, N., Smith, P. M., & Peters, L. (2002). The/s/ morpheme and the compounding phenomenon in English. In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the cognitive science society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Jacoby, L. L. (1983). Remembering the data: Analysing interactive processes in rending. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 485-508.
12. Kiparsky, P. (1983). From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In H. van der Hulst & N. Smith (Eds.), The structure of phonological representations (pp. 131-175). Dordrecht: Foris.
13. Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
14. Lardiere, D. (1995). L2 acquisition of English synthetic compounding is not constrained by level-ordering (and neither probably is L1). Second Language Research, 11, 67-269.
15. Lardiere, D., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Feature-marking in the L2 development of deverbal compounds. Journal of Linguistics, 33, 327-353.
16. Marcus, G. F. (1995). Children's overregularisation of English Plurals: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Child Language, 22, 447-459.
17. Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Weise, R., & Pinker, S. (1995). German inflection: The exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189-256.
18. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533.
19. Murphy, V. A. (2000). Compounding and the representation of inflectional morphology. Language Learning, 50, 153-197.
20. Nicoladis, E. (2000). Acquisition of compound nouns: When comprehension does not fully precede production. Paper presented at the Compound Processing Symposium. Vienna, Austria.
21. Oetting, J. B., & Rice, M. (1993). Plural acquisition in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1236-1248.
22. Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.
23. Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a Parallel Distributed Processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28, 73-193.
24. Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1992). Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules of grammar. In L. A. Sutton, C. Johnson, & R. Shields (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Berkeley Linguistics Society, 230-251.
25. Roediger, H. L., Weldon, M. S., & Challis, B. A. (1989). Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account. In H. L. Roediger, III & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honor of Endel Tulving. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Seidenberg, M.S., & MacDonald, M.C. (1999). A probabilistic constraints approach to language acquisition and processing. Cognitive Science, 23, 569-588.
27. van der Lely, H. K. J., & Christian, V. (2000). Lexical word formation in children with grammatical SLI: A grammar-specific versus an input-processing deficit? Cognition, 75, 33-63.
28. Weldon, M. S. (1991). Mechanisms underlying priming on perceptual tasks. Journal of experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 17, 526-541.