Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement

Cohen, Clara

doi:10.1007/s11525-014-9243-y

Cited by 49 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There remains the question as to how phonetic reduction associated with higher syntagmatic or paradigmatic probability can be squared with phonetic enhancement associated with higher paradigmatic probability. Our results suggest that these two effects can operate simultaneously in the same data, a conclusion also drawn by Cohen (2014b) and Kuperman et al (2007). One possibility is that these two types of effect operate at different linguistic levels, involving different neural pathways.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Enhancementsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…This is comparable to the phonetic enhancement effects found by e.g. Kuperman et al (2007) and Cohen (2014b), and can be conceived of as a sort of practice or entrenchment effect. A possible explanation goes as follows: if activation flows more strongly to the heads of more frequent compounds, then for example, production of city as a compound modifier is likely to strongly activate the very frequent compound city centre.…”

Section: Paradigmatic Supportsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…Finally, the Paradigmatic Support Hypothesis takes the structure of the morphological paradigm as its starting point and says that stronger paradigmatic support for an element in the paradigm (i.e. greater relative frequency compared to other members of the paradigm) leads to acoustic lengthening of that element (Cohen 2014b;Kuperman et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How morphological structure affects phonetic realisation in English compound nouns

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Mechanisms Of Enhancementsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Paradigmatic Supportsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How morphological structure affects phonetic realisation in English compound nouns

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, writers must now make a choice between <able> and <ible>, both of which represent common affixes. Paradigmatic competition has been demonstrated to affect pronunciation variation (Cohen, 2014;Kuperman, Pluymaekers, Ernestus, & Baayen, 2007), and it seems plausible that it might also affect spelling variation. Competition might be particularly strong in highly segmentable words and might make such words difficult spelling targets.…”

Section: Typicality Vs Segmentabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is the opposite of what we observed here. However, competition as discussed in (Cohen, 2014;Kuperman et al, 2007) depends on several other factors (such as morphological family size). We consider the relationship between segmentability and competition to be an avenue worth exploring in future research.…”

Section: Typicality Vs Segmentabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spelling errors in English derivational suffixes reflect morphological boundary strength

Gahl

Plag

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To what extent do speakers decompose morphologically complex words, such assegmentable, into their morphological constituents? In this article, we argue that spelling errors in English affixes reflect morphological boundary strength and degrees of segmentability. In support of this argument, we present a case study examining the spelling of the suffixes -able/-ible, -ence/-ance, and -mentin an online resource (Tweets), in forms such as <availible>, <invisable>, <eloquance>, and <bettermint>. Based on previous research on morphological productivity and boundary strength (Hay, 2002;Hay & Baayen, 2002,2005), we hypothesized that morphological segmentability should affect the choice between <able> vs. <ible>, <ance> vs. <ence>, and <ment> vs. <-mint>. An analysis of roughly 23,000 non-standard spellings is consistent with that hypothesis, underscoring the usefulness of spelling variation as a source of evidence for morphological segmentability and for the role of morphological representations in language production and comprehension.

show abstract

Paradigmatic enhancement of stem vowels in regular English inflected verb forms

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many theories of word structure in linguistics and morphological processing in cognitive psychology are grounded in a compositional perspective on the (mental) lexicon in which complex words are built up during speech production from sublexical elements such as morphemes, stems, and exponents. When combined with the hypothesis that storage in the lexicon is restricted to the irregular, the prediction follows that properties specific to regular inflected words cannot co-determine the phonetic realization of these inflected words. This study shows that the stem vowels of regular English inflected verb forms that are more frequent in their paradigm are produced with more enhanced articulatory gestures in the midsaggital plane, challenging compositional models of lexical processing. The effect of paradigmatic probability dovetails well with the Paradigmatic Enhancement Hypothesis and is consistent with a growing body of research indicating that the whole is more than its parts.

show abstract

Probabilistic reduction and probabilistic enhancement

Cited by 49 publications

References 60 publications

How morphological structure affects phonetic realisation in English compound nouns

How morphological structure affects phonetic realisation in English compound nouns

Spelling errors in English derivational suffixes reflect morphological boundary strength

Paradigmatic enhancement of stem vowels in regular English inflected verb forms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About