Morphemic ambiguity resolution in chinese: Activation of the subordinate meaning with a prior dominant-biased context

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 875-881

  Tsang, Yiu Kei ^a   Chen, Hsuan Chih ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHINA; EYE FIXATION; EYE MOVEMENT; HEARING; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHONETICS; PHOTOSTIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS;

AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CHINA; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); EYE MOVEMENTS; FIXATION, OCULAR; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; PHONETICS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS;

EID: 78651227719     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.17.6.875     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 419-439.
2. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing "visual world" eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory & Language, 59, 457-474.
4. Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2000). The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy, and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 489-511.
5. Binder, K. S., & Rayner, K. (1998). Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 271-276.
6. Chen, L., & Boland, J. E. (2008). Dominance and context effects on activation of alternative homophone meanings. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1306-1323.
7. Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 429-446.
8. Gonnerman, L. M., Seidenberg, M. S., & Andersen, E. S. (2007).Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 323-345.
9. Hay, J. B., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9,342-348.
10. Hogaboam, T. W., & Perfetti, C. A. (1975). Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 14, 256-274.
11. Huettig, F., & Altmann, G. T. M. (2007). Visual-shape competition during language-mediated attention is based on lexical input and not modulated by contextual appropriateness. Visual Cognition, 15, 985-1018.
12. Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory & Language, 59, 434-446.
13. Kuperman, V., Bertram, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2010). Processing trade-offs in the reading of Dutch derived words. Journal of Memory & Language, 62, 83-97.
14. Mirman, D., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory & Language, 59, 475-494.
15. Pacht, J. M., & Rayner, K. (1993). The processing of homophonic homographs during reading: Evidence from eye movement studies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 251-271.
16. R Development Core Team (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
17. Sereno, S. C. (1995). Resolution of lexical ambiguity: Evidence from an eye movement priming paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 582-595.
18. Tabossi, P. (1988). Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 324-340.
19. Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language & Cognitive Processes, 25, 277-296.
20. Vu, H., Kellas, G., & Paul, S. T. (1998). Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory & Cognition, 26, 979-1001.