Accentuate the Positive: Semantic Access in English Compounds

Abstract

The present study supplements research on semantic effects in word processing by focusing on the role that meanings of morphemes play in recognition of complex words. We present an overview of behavioral effects of six semantic properties characterizing the emotional and sensory connotations of English compounds and their morphemes, as well as their semantic richness. Semantics of compounds affected latencies to those compounds, and semantics of morphemes affected latencies to those morphemes presented as isolated words. Yet semantics of morphemes had little bearing on recognition of compounds, with the exception of longer recognition times for compounds with emotionally negative morphemes (e.g., seasick). We interpret the data as evidence against obligatory decomposition and dual-route accounts of morphological processing and in favor of the naive discriminative learning account that posits independent, morphologically unmediated, and simultaneous access to all meanings activated by orthographic cues in the visual input. We discuss selectivity and division of attention as driving forces in complex word recognition.

A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience

“…Although semantic variables have previously been investigated for compound words, Kuperman (2013) noted that most of these variables are relational, in that they require an evaluation of the meaning of the compound's two lexemes in relation to the meaning of the entire compound word. Not much effort has been directed at examining what nonrelational semantic properties influence compound word recognition or whether the individual meanings of the lexemes are accessed in concert with the compound word.…”

“…Juhasz and Yap extended this work to disyllabic words, as well, and included additional control variables. Kuperman (2013) examined the influences of both BOI and SER on compound word processing. Although BOI was not found to have an effect on compound word lexical decision times, compound SER did significantly predict these times.…”

“…Semantic transparency and LMD are both examples of what Kuperman (2013) refers to as relational semantic variables, since they both index the relationship in meaning between the lexemes in the compound word and the overall compound word meaning. As we discussed above, semantic transparency has been found to influence the processing of English compound words in a lexical decision task, but only when the experimental setup favors decomposition (Ji et al, 2011).…”

Masked constituent priming of English compounds in native and non-native speakers

“…More widespread use of experimental methodologies with high timescale resolution, such as eye-tracking, ERP and MEG measures (cf. Clahsen et al, 2013;Kuperman, 2013;Fiorentino et al, 2014;De Cat et al, 2015), may provide invaluable insight into the time course of access to morphological information in nonnative language processing, and allow us to further inspect whether any qualitative differences exist between native and nonnative speakers in their use and representation of morphology. We believe that most currently available evidence, including the data from the present experiment, points to the contrary.…”

“…Current positions range from models advocating exclusively morpheme mediated access (Stockall & Marantz, 2006;Taft & Nillsen, 2013), to dual/multiple-route accounts highlighting the competition (and/or cooperation) between whole-form and morpheme-based access (Hyönä, 2012), to proposals questioning the role of morphology in favour of a distributed-connectionist implementation of unmediated access to constituent and whole-word meanings through orthographic and/or phonological cues (e.g., Devlin, Jamison, Matthews, & Gonnerman, 2004;Kuperman, 2013;Seidenberg & Gonnerman, 2000).…”