On the lexical representation of compound nouns: Evidence from a picture-naming task with compound targets and gender-marked determiner primes in aphasia

Lorenz, Antje; Pino, Danièle; Jescheniak, Jörg D.; Obrig, Hellmuth

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2021.09.019

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a determiner-priming study, Lorenz, Mädebach, et al (2018) observed that compound naming was facilitated when participants were presented head-congruent determiners, while no such priming effect could be observed for modifier-congruent determiners. This suggests that the gender information of the modifiers was not activated during compound production, in line with a single-lemma representation of compounds (for contrasting data from aphasia, see Lorenz, Pino, et al, 2021).…”

Section: The Representation and Production Of Compoundsmentioning

confidence: 90%

On the lexical representation(s) of compounds: A continuous picture naming study.

Döring¹,

Rahman²,

Zwitserlood³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lexical representation of compound words in speech production is still under debate. While most studies with healthy adult speakers suggest that a single lemma representation is active during compound production, data from neuropsychological studies point toward multiple representations, with activation of the compound’s constituent lemmas in addition to the compound’s lemma. This study exploits the cumulative semantic interference effect to investigate the lexical representation of compounds in speech production. In a continuous picture naming experiment, category membership was established through the compounds’ first constituents (category animals: zebra crossing, pony tail, cat litter …), while the compounds themselves were not semantically related. Moreover, pictures depicting the compounds’ first constituents (zebra, pony, cat …) were presented as a control condition. As expected, naming latencies within categories increased linearly with each additionally named category member when producing monomorphemic words, which is interpreted as increasing interference during lexical selection. Importantly, this cumulative semantic interference effect was also observed for compounds. This indicates that the lemmas of the compounds’ first constituents were activated during compound production, causing interference due to their semantic relationship and thereby hampering the production of the whole compound. The results are thus in line with the multiple-lemma representation account (Marelli et al., 2012). We argue that the apparent contradiction between results of previous studies with healthy adult speakers and our current study can be explained by the different experimental paradigms used.

show abstract

Section: The Representation and Production Of Compoundsmentioning

confidence: 90%

On the lexical representation(s) of compounds: A continuous picture naming study.

Döring¹,

Rahman²,

Zwitserlood³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If it was located at the interface of the conceptual and the lexical (i.e., lemma) level, one might expect that the lemma representation of the targets influences cumulative interference. More specifically, as we assume different representational formats for compounds and simple nouns [ 27 , 46 , 47 but see 43 ], different magnitudes of cumulative interference should have been observed. This is because in the simple noun condition, the learning mechanism responsible for cumulative interference would only strengthen the connection between the conceptual representation (SHELF) and the one corresponding lemma representation [ shelf ; 22 ] and potentially weaken the connections to other related targets [ 29 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, interference is assumed to come into effect at the lexical level, more specifically at the lemma level [e.g., 6 , but see 4 ], and recent empirical evidence suggests that compounds and simple nouns may not be represented in the same way at this level. While simple nouns (e.g., shelf ) are assumed to have a single entry at the lemma level [ 6 ], studies on compounds (e.g., bookshelf ) suggest that they may have multiple lemma representations [ 27 , 46 , 47 ], namely morpheme-sized lemma entries ( book and shelf) that complement the holistic compound lemma [for evidence from neuropsychological studies, see e.g., 46 , 48 , 49 ]. If compounds and simple nouns are differently represented on the level where cumulative interference is said to come into effect, different activation patterns might lead to different patterns of cumulative interference [for contrasting evidence, see e.g., 43 , 50 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cumulative semantic interference is blind to morphological complexity and originates at the conceptual level

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When naming a sequence of pictures of the same semantic category (e.g., furniture), response latencies systematically increase with each named category member. This cumulative semantic interference effect has become a popular tool to investigate the cognitive architecture of language production. However, not all processes underlying the effect itself are fully understood, including the question where the effect originates from. While some researchers assume the interface of the conceptual and lexical level as its origin, others suggest the conceptual-semantic level. The latter assumption follows from the observation that cumulative effects, namely cumulative facilitation, can also be observed in purely conceptual-semantic tasks. Another unanswered question is whether cumulative interference is affected by the morphological complexity of the experimental targets. In two experiments with the same participants and the same material, we investigated both of these issues. Experiment 1, a continuous picture naming task, investigated whether morphologically complex nouns (e.g., kitchen table) elicit identical levels of cumulative interference to morphologically simple nouns (e.g., table). Our results show this to be the case, indicating that cumulative interference is unaffected by lexical information such as morphological complexity. In Experiment 2, participants classified the same target objects as either man-made or natural. As expected, we observed cumulative facilitation. A separate analysis showed that this facilitation effect can be predicted by the individuals’ effect sizes of cumulative interference, suggesting a strong functional link between the two effects. Our results thus point to a conceptual-semantic origin of cumulative semantic interference.

show abstract

People with aphasia show stable Cumulative Semantic Interference (CSI) when tested repeatedly in a web-based paradigm: A perspective for longitudinal assessment

Stark,

Töpel,

Regenbrecht

et al. 2024

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the lexical representation of compound nouns: Evidence from a picture-naming task with compound targets and gender-marked determiner primes in aphasia

Cited by 3 publications

References 93 publications

On the lexical representation(s) of compounds: A continuous picture naming study.

On the lexical representation(s) of compounds: A continuous picture naming study.

Cumulative semantic interference is blind to morphological complexity and originates at the conceptual level

People with aphasia show stable Cumulative Semantic Interference (CSI) when tested repeatedly in a web-based paradigm: A perspective for longitudinal assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About