A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: Meg evidence

Mental Lexicon

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 85-123

  Linnaea, Stockall ^a   Marantz, Alec ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decomposition; Irregular allomorphy; Lexical access; Magnetoencephalography; Morphology

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249024935     PISSN: 18711340     EISSN: 18711375     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/ml.1.1.07sto     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Adachi, Y., Shimogawara, M., Higuchi, M., Haruta, Y., & Ochiai, M. (2001). Reduction of nonperiodical extramural magnetic noise in MEG measurement by continually adjusted least squares method. IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, ASC2000, Virginia Beach.
2. Albright, A. (2002). Islands of reliability for regular morphology: Evidence from Italian. Language, 78, 684-709.
3. Albright, A., & Badecker, W. (2002). Inflectional regularity: Probing the nature of lexical representation in a cross-modal priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 705-722.
4. Albright, A., & Hayes, B. (2003). Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition, 90, 119-161.
5. Baayen, R.H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 94-117.
6. Beretta, A., Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D. (2005). The effects of homonymy and polysemy on lexical access: An MEG study. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(1), 57-65.
7. Bergen, B.K., (2004). The psychological reality of phonaesthemes. Language, 80(2), 290-311.
8. Boudelaa, S., & Marlsen-Wilson, W.D. (2003). Abstract morphemes and lexical representation: The CV-skeleton in Arabic. Cognition, 92, 271-303.
9. Boudelaa, S., & Marlsen-Wilson, W.D. (2000). Non-concatenative morphemes in language processing: Evidence from Modern Standard Arabic. Proceedings of the Workshop on Spoken Word Access Processes (pp. 23-26). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
10. Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.
11. Clahsen, H. (1999). Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 991-1060.
12. Cohen, J.D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25(2), 257-271.
13. Daugherty, K.G., & Seidenberg, M.S. (2001). Beyond rules and exceptions: A connectionist approach to inflectional morphology. In S.D. Lima, R.L. Corrigan, & G.K. Iverson (Eds.), The Reality of Linguistic Rules (pp. 353-388). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
14. de Almeida, R., & Libben, G. (2005). Changing morphological structures: The effect of sentence context on the interpretation of structurally ambiguous English trimorphemic words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1/2), 373-394.
15. Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Bihan, D.L., Mangin, J.-F., Poline, J.-B. et al. (2001). Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nature Neuroscience, 4(7), 752-758.
16. nd ed., pp. 832-835). Boston: Bedford. (Original work published 1919)
17. Embick, D., Hackl, M., Schaeffer, J., Kelepir, M., & Marantz, A. (2001). A magnetoencepha-lographic component whose latency reflects lexical frequency. Cognitive Brain Research, 10(3), 345-348.
18. Feldman, L.B. (2000). Are morphological effects distinguishable from the effects of shared meaning and shared form? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1431-1444.
19. Feldman, L.B., & Larabee, J. (2001). Morphological facilitation following prefixed but not suffixed primes: Lexical architecture or modality-specific processes? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(3), 680-691.
20. th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1342). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Forster, K.I., & Forster, J.C. (1990). The DMASTR display system for mental chronometry. Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona.
22. Friederici, A.D., Pfeifer, E., & Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related brain potential during natural speech processing: Effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations. Cognitive Brain Research, 1(3), 183-192.
23. Frost, R., Forster, K.L., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23, 829-856.
24. Gross, M., Say, T., Kleingers, M., Clahsen, H., & Münte, T.F. (1998). Human brain potentials to violations in morphologically complex Italian words. Neuroscience Letters, 241, 83-86.
25. Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale, & S.J. Keyser (Eds.), A view from Building 20 (pp. 111-176). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
26. Hamalainen, M., Hari, R., Ilmoniemi, R.J., Knuutila, J., & Lounasmaa, O.L. (1993). Magne-toencephalography: Theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain. Review of Modern Physics, 65, 413-495.
27. Harada, N., Iwaki, S., Nakagawa, S., Yamaguchi, M., & Tonoike, M. (2004). Effect of word familiarity on visually evoked magnetic fields. Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, 30.
28. Helenius, P., Salmelin, R., Service, E., & Connolly, J.F. (1998). Distinct time courses of word and context comprehension in the left temporal cortex. Brain, 121, 1133-1142.
29. Helenius, P., Salmelin, R., Service, E., & Connolly, J.F. (1999). Semantic cortical activation in dyslexic readers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11(5), 535-550.
30. Jarvikivi, J., & Niemi, J. (2002). Form-based representation in the mental lexicon: Priming (with) bound stem allomorphs in Finnish. Brain and Language, 81, (412-423).
31. Koyama, S., Kakigi, R., Hoshiyama, M., & Kitamura, Y. (1998). Reading of Japanese Kanji (morphograms) and Kana (syllabograms): A magnetoencephalographic study. Neuro-psychologia, 36(1), 83-98.
32. Kuriki, S., Takauchi, F., Fujimaki, N., & Kobayashi, T. (1996). Magnetoencephalographic study on the cerebral neural activities related to the processing of visually presented characters. Cognitive Brain Research, 4, 185-199.
33. Makela, A.M., Makinen, V., Nikkila, M., Ilmoniemi, R.J., & Tiitinen, H. (2001). Megnetoen-cephalographic (MEG) localization of the auditory N400m: Effects of stimulus duration. Neuroreport, 12(2), 249-253.
34. th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 693-698.
35. Marlsen-Wilson, W.D., & Tyler, L.K. (1997). Dissociating types of mental computation. Nature, 387, 592-594.
36. Marlsen-Wilson, W.D., & Tyler, L.K. (1998). Rules, representation and the English past tense. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 2(11), 428-435.
37. Marlsen-Wilson, W.D., & Tyler, L.K. (2003). Capturing underlying differentiation in the human language system. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 62-63.
38. Marlsen-Wilson, W.D., & Zhou, X. (1999). Abstractness, allomorphy, and lexical architecture. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(4), 321-352.
39. McClelland, J., & Patterson, K. (2002a). Rules or connections in past tense inflections: What does the evidence rule out? Trends in Cognitive Neurosciences, 6(11), 465-472.
40. McClelland, J., & Patterson, K. (2002b). ‘Words or rules’ cannot exploit the regularity in exceptions. Trends in Cognitive Neurosciences, 6(11), 464-472.
41. McClelland, J., & Patterson, K. (2003). Differentiation and integration in human language. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 63-64.
42. Miozzo, M. (2003). On the processing of regular and irregular forms of verbs and nouns: Evidence from neuropsychology. Cognition, 87, 101-127.
43. Napps, S.E. (1989). Morphemic relationships in the lexicon: Are they distinct from semantic and formal relationships? Memory and Cognition, 17, 729-739.
44. Pastizzo, M.J., & Feldman, L.B. (2002). Does prime modality influence morphological processing? Brain and Language, 81, 28-41.
45. Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules in the human brain. Nature, 387, 547-548.
46. Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28, 73-193.
47. Pinker, S., & Ullman, M.T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11), 456-463.
48. Pylkanen, L., Feintuch, S., Hopkins, S., & Marantz, A. (2004). Neural correlates of morphological family frequency and family size: An MEG study. Cognition, 91, B35-B45.
49. Pylkanen, L., Gonnerman, L., Stringfellow, A., & Marantz, A. (submitted). Disambiguating the source of phonological inhibition effects in lexical decision: An MEG study.
50. Pylkanen, L., Llínas, R., & Murphy, G. (in press). Representation of polysemy: MEG evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
51. Pylkanen, L., & Marantz, A. (2003). Tracking the time course of work recognition with MEG. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 187-189.
52. Pylkanen, L., Stringfellow, A., Flagg, E., & Marantz, A. (2000). A neural response sensitive to repetition and phonotactic probability: MEG investigations of lexical access. Proceedings of Biomag 2000, Helsinki, Finland.
53. Pylkanen, L., Stringfellow, A., & Marantz, A. (2002). Neuromagnetic evidence for the timing of lexical activation: An MEG component sensitive to phonotactic probability but not to neighbourhood density. Brain and Language, 81, 666-678.
54. Rastle, K., & Davis, M.H. (2003). Reading morphologically-complex words: Some thoughts from masked priming. In S. Kinoshita, & S.J. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: State of the art (pp. 279-305). New York: Psychology Press.
55. Rastle, K., Davis, M.H., Marlsen-Wilson, W.D., & Tyler, L.K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4/5), 405-537.
56. Ruekl, J., Mikolinski, M., Raveh, M., Miner, C., & Mars F., (1997). Morphological priming, fragment completion, and connectionist networks. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 382-405.
57. Rumelhart, D.E., & McClelland, J.L. (1986). On learning past tenses of English verbs. In D.E. Rumelhart, & J.L. McClelland (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Psychological and Biological Models (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
58. Seidenberg, M.S., & Gonnerman, L.M. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(9), 353-361.
59. Sekiguchi, T., Koyama, S., & Kakigi, R. (2000). The effect of word repetition on evoked magnetic responses in the human brain. Japanese Psychological Research, 42, 3-14.
60. Sereno, S., & Rayner, K. (2003). Measuring word recognition in reading: Eye movements and event-related potentials. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 489-493.
61. nd ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
62. Smolensky, P. (1995). Reply: Constituent structure and explanation in an integrated connec-tionist/symbolic cognitive architecture. In C. Macdonald, & G. Macdonald (Eds.), Con-nectionism: Debates on psychological explanation. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
63. Sonnenstuhl, I., Eisenbeiss, S., & Clahsen, H. (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition, 72, 203-236.
64. Stanners, R.F., Neiser, J.J., Hernon, W.P., & Hall, R. (1979). Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 399-412.
65. Stockall, L., Stringfellow, A., & Marantz, A. (2004). The precise time course of lexical activation: MEG measurements of the effects of frequency, probability, and density in lexical decision. Brain and Language, 90, 88-94.
66. Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 271-294.
67. Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A(4), 745-765.
68. Taft, M., & Forster, K. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(6), 638-647.
69. Tsapkini, K., Jarema, G., & Kehayia, E. (2004). Regularity revisited: Modality matters. Brain and Language, 89, 611-616.
70. Tyler, L.K., deMornay-Davies, P., Anokhina, R., Longworth, C., Randall, B., & Marlsen-Wil-son, W.D. (2002). Dissociation in processing past tense morphology: Neuropathology and behavioral studies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(1), 79-94.
71. Tyler, L.K., Randall, B., & Marlsen-Wilson, W.D. (2002). Phonology and neuropsychology of the English past tense. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1154-1166.
72. Ullman, M.T. (2001). A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 2, 717-727.
73. Ullman, M.T., Corkin, S., Coppola, M., Hickock, G., Growdon, J.H., Koroshetz, W.J. et al. (1997). A neural dissociation within language: Evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(2), 266-276.