Sentential context and the interpretation of familiar open-compounds and novel modifier-noun phrases

Language and Speech

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 203-221

  Gagné, Christina L ^a   Spalding, Thomas L ^a   Gorríe, Melissa C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Combination; Compounds; Comprehension; Conceptual; Lexical access; Noun phrases

Indexed keywords

EID: 29344473763     PISSN: 00238309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00238309050480020401     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. ALTMANN, G., & STEEDMAN, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
2. ANDREWS, S. (1986). Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects? Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 726-740.
3. BENSON, M., BENSON, E., & ILSON, R. (1997). The BBI dictionary of English word combinations. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
4. BUTTERWORTH, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 2, pp. 257-294). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
5. DOWNING, P. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53, 810-842.
6. GAGNÉ, C. L. (2000). Relation-based combinations versus property-based combinations: A test of the CARIN theory and dual-process theory of conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 365-389.
7. GAGNÉ, C. L. (2001). Relation and lexical priming during the interpretation of noun-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 236-254.
8. GAGNÉ, C. L. (2002a). Lexical and relational influences on the processing of novel compounds. Brain and Language, 81, 723-735.
9. GAGNÉ, C. L. (2002b). Metaphoric interpretations of comparison-based combinations. Metaphor and Symbol, 17, 161-178.
10. GAGNÉ, C. L., & SHOBEN, E. J. (1997). The influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23, 71-87.
11. GAGNÉ, C. L., & SPALDING, T. L. (2004a). Effect of discourse context and modifier relation frequency on conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 444-455.
12. GAGNÉ, C. L., & SPALDING, T. L. (2004b). Effect of relation availability on the interpretation and access of familiar noun-noun compounds. Brain and Language, 90, 478-486.
13. GERRIG, R. J. (1989). The time-course of sense creation. Memory and Cognition, 17, 194-207.
14. GERRIG, R. J., & BORTFELD, H. (1999). Sense creation in and out of discourse contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 457-468.
15. GERRIG, R. J., & GIBBS, R. W. J. (1988). Beyond the lexicon: Creativity in language production. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 3, 1-19.
16. INHOFF, A. W., BRIIHL, D., & SCHWARTZ, J. (1996). Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks. Memory and Cognition, 24, 466-476.
17. INHOFF, A. W., RADACH, R., & HELLER, D. (2000). Complex compounds in German: Interword spaces facilitate segmentation but hinder assignment of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 23-50.
18. LEVI, J. N. (1978). The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. New York: Academic Press.
19. LIBBEN, G. (1998). Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: Consequences for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, 61, 30-44.
20. LIBBEN, G., GIBSON, M., YOON, Y. B., & DOMINIER, S. (2003). Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, 84, 50-64.
21. LIMA, S. D., & POLLATSEK, A. (1983). Lexical access via an orthographic code? The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS) reconsidered. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 310-332.
22. MacDONALD, M. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157-201.
23. MacDONALD, M., PEARLMUTTER, N., & SEIDENBURG, M. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 4, 679-703.
24. PICKERING, M. J., & TRAXLER, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden-paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 940-961.
25. SANDRA, D. (1990). On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42A, 529-567.
26. SANDRA, D. (1994). The morphology of the mental lexicon: Internal word structure viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 227-269.
27. SPALDING, T. L., & GAGNÉ, C. L. (2004). The role of semantic property activation in relation selection during conceptual combination. Paper presented at the Fourth International Mental Lexicon Conference, Windsor, Canada.
28. SPIVEY, M. J., & TANENHAUS, M. K. (1998). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1521-1543.
29. TAFT, M. (1981). Prefix stripping revisited. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 289-297.
30. TEALL, F. (1892). English compound words and phrases. New York: Funk and Wagnalls.
31. THORNTON, R., MacDONALD, M. C., & GIL, M. (1999). Pragmatic constraint on the interpretation of complex noun phrases in Spanish and English. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1347-1365.
32. TRUESWELL, J., TANENHAUS, M., & KELLO, C. (1993). Verb specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 528-553.
33. ZWITZERLOOD, P. (1994). The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 341-368.