Effects of Iconicity and Semantic Relatedness on Lexical Access in American Sign Language

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1573-1581

  Bosworth, Rain G ^a   Emmorey, Karen ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

American Sign Language; Iconicity; Lexical recognition; Semantic priming

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; IMITATION; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; SIGN LANGUAGE; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; DEAFNESS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMITATIVE BEHAVIOR; MALE; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; SIGN LANGUAGE; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 78249287235     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0020934     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson D., Reilly J.S. The puzzle of negation: How children move from communicative to grammatical negation in ASL. Applied Psycholinguistics 1997, 18:411-429. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400010912.
2. Anderson D., Reilly J.S. The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory: Normative data for American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 2002, 7:83-106. doi: 10.1093/deafed/7.2.83.
3. Armstrong D.F., Stokoe W.C., Wilcox S. Gesture and the nature of language 1995, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
4. Aronoff M., Meir I., Sandler W. The paradox of sign language morphology. Language 2005, 81:301-344. doi: 10.1353/lan.2005.0043.
5. Baus, C., Carreiras, M., & Emmorey, K. (2010). When does iconicity in sign language matter? Manuscript submitted for publication.
6. Baus C., Gutiérrez-Sigut E., Quer J., Carreiras M. Lexical access in Catalan Signed Language (LSC) production. Cognition 2008, 108:856-865. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.05.012.
7. Brentari D. A prosodic model of sign language phonology 1998, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
8. Campbell R., Martin P., White T. Forced choice recognition of sign in novice British Sign Language learners. Applied Linguistics 1992, 13:185-201. doi: 10.1093/applin/13.2.185.
9. Carreiras M., Gutiérrez-Sigut E., Baquero S., Corina D. Lexical processing in Spanish Sign Language (LSE). Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 58:100-122. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.05.004.
10. Collins A.M., Loftus E.F. A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review 1975, 82:407-428. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407.
11. Coltheart M. The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 1981, 33(A):497-505.
12. Corina, D. P., & Emmorey, K. (1993, November). Lexical priming in American Sign Language. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.
13. Corina D.P., Hildebrandt U. Psycholinguistic investigations of phonological structure in American Sign Language. Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages 2002, 88-111. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486777.005. R.P. Meier, K. Cormier, D. Quinto-Pozos (Eds.).
14. Corina D.P., Knapp H. Lexical retrieval in American Sign Language production. Papers in laboratory phonology 2006, 213-240. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany, doi: 10.1515/9783110197211.1.213. L.M. Goldstein, D.H. Whalen, C.T. Best (Eds.).
15. Cree G.S., McRae K., McNorgan C. An attractor model of lexical conceptual processing: Simulating semantic priming. Cognitive Science 1999, 23:371-414. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2303_4.
16. Dye M.W., Shih S. Phonological priming in British Sign Language. Papers in laboratory phonology 2006, 241-264. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany, doi: 10.1515/9783110197211.1.241. L.M. Goldstein, D.H. Whalen, C.T. Best (Eds.).
17. Emmorey K. Repetition priming with aspect and agreement morphology in American Sign Language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1991, 20:365-388. doi: 10.1007/BF01067970.
18. Emmorey K. Language, cognition, and the brain: Insights from sign language research 2002, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
19. Emmorey K. The psycholinguistics of signed and spoken languages: How biology affects processing. The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics 2007, 703-721. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. G. Gaskell (Ed.).
20. Emmorey K., Corina D.P. Lexical recognition in sign language: Effects of phonetic structure and morphology. Perceptual & Motor Skills 1990, 71:1227-1252.
21. Emmorey K., Grabowski T., McCullough S., Damasio H., Ponto L., Hichwa R., Bellugi U. Motor-iconicity of sign language does not alter the neural systems underlying tool and action naming. Brain and Language 2004, 89:27-37. doi: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00309-2.
22. Grosjean F. Sign and word recognition: A first comparison. Sign Language Studies 1981, 32:195-219.
23. Grote K., Linz E. The influence of sign language iconicity on semantic conceptualization. From signs to signing: Iconicity in language and literature 3 2003, 23-40. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. W. Muller, O. Fischer (Eds.).
24. Hamburger M., Slowiaczek L.M. Phonological priming reflects lexical competition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1996, 3:520-525.
25. Hanson V.L., Feldman L.B. Language specificity in lexical organization: Evidence from deaf signers' lexical organization of American Sign Language and English. Memory & Cognition 1989, 17:292-301.
26. Hinton L., Nichols J., Ohala J. Sound symbolism 1994, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
27. Klima E.S., Bellugi U. The signs of language 1979, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
28. Marshall J., Atkinson J., Smulovitch E., Thacker A., Woll B. Aphasia in a user of British Sign Language: Dissociation between sign and gesture. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2004, 21:537-554. doi: 10.1080/02643290342000249.
29. Marslen-Wilson W., Tyler L.K., Waksler R., Older L. Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review 1994, 101:3-33. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3.
30. Meier R.P. Elicited imitation of verb agreement in American Sign Language. Journal of Memory and Language 1987, 26:362-376. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(87)90119-7.
31. Meir, I. (in press). Iconicity and metaphor: Constraints on metaphorical use of iconic forms. Language.
32. Meyer D.E., Schvaneveldt R.W. Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1971, 90:227-234. doi: 10.1037/h0031564.
33. Namy L.L., Campbell A.L., Tomasello M. The changing role of iconicity in non-verbal symbol learning: A U-shaped trajectory in the acquisition of arbitrary gestures. Journal of Cognition and Development 2004, 5:37-57. doi: 10.1207/s15327647jcd0501_3.
34. Newport E.L., Meier R. The acquisition of American Sign Language. The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 1. The data 1985, 881-938. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. D.I. Slobin (Ed.).
35. Orlansky M.D., Bonvillian J.D. The role of iconicity in early sign language acquisition. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1984, 49:287-292.
36. Ormel, E. (2008). Visual word recognition in bilingual children (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
37. Petitto L.A. On the autonomy of language and gesture: Evidence from the acquisition of personal pronouns in American Sign Language. Cognition 1987, 27:1-52. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(87)90034-5.
38. Poizner H., Bellugi U., Tweney R.D. Processing of formational, semantic, and iconic information in American Sign Language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1981, 7:1146-1159. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.7.5.1146.
39. Sandler W. The spreading hand autosegment of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 1986, 50:1-28.
40. Sandler W., Lillo-Martin D. Sign language and linguistic universals 2006, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
41. Sutton-Spence R. Analysing sign language poetry 2005, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, England.
42. Taub S.F. Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American Sign Language 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511509629.
43. Thompson R.L., Vinson D.P., Vigliocco G. The link between form and meaning in American Sign Language: Lexical processing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009, 35:550-557. doi: 10.1037/a0014547.
44. Thompson R.L., Vinson D.P., Vigliocco G. The link between form and meaning in British Sign Language: Effects of iconicity for phonological decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2010, 36:1017-1027. doi: 10.1037/a0019339.
45. Vigliocco G., Vinson D.P., Woolfe T., Dye M.W., Woll B. Language and imagery: Effects of language modality. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 2005, 272:1859-1863. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3169.
46. Wilcox S. Gesture and language. Gesture 2004, 4:43-73. doi: 10.1075/gest.4.1.04wil.