Abstract
Much research suggests that words comprising more than one morpheme are represented in a “decomposed” manner in the visual word recognition system. In the research presented here, we investigate what information is used to segment a word into its morphemic constituents and, in particular, whether semantic information plays a role in that segmentation. Participants made visual lexical decisions to stem targets preceded by masked primes sharing (1) a semantically transparent morphological relationship with the target (e.g.,cleaner-CLEAN), (2) an apparent morphological relationship but no semantic relationship with the target (e.g.,corner-CORN), and (3) a nonmorphological form relationship with the target (e.g.,brothel-BROTH). Results showed significant and equivalent masked priming effects in cases in which primes and targets appeared to be morphologically related, and priming in these conditions could be distinguished from nonmorphological form priming. We argue that these findings suggest a level of representation at which apparently complex words are decomposed on the basis of their morpho-orthographic properties. Implications of these findings for computational models of reading are discussed.
Article PDF
References
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., &van Rijn, H. (1993). {The CELEX lexical database} [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
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.
Brent, M. R. (1999). Speech segmentation and word discovery: A computational perspective.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,3, 294–301.
Cairns, P., Shillcock, R., Chater, N., &Levy, J. (1997). Bootstrapping word boundaries: A bottom-up corpus-based approach to speech segmentation.Cognitive Psychology,33, 111–153.
Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., &Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud.Psychological Review,108, 204–256.
Davis, M. H., van Casteren, M., &Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2003). Frequency effects in processing inflected Dutch nouns: A distributed connectionist account. In R. H. Baayen & R. Schreuder (Eds.),Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 427–462). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Feldman, L. B. (2000). Are morphological effects distinguishable from the effects of shared meaning and shared form?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 1431–1444.
Feldman, L. B., &Soltano, E. G. (1999). Morphological priming: The role of prime duration, semantic transparency, and affix position.Brain & Language,68, 33–39.
Forster, K. I., &Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 680–698.
Forster, K. I., &Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,35, 116–124.
Giraudo, H., &Grainger, J. (2000). Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming.Language & Cognitive Processes,15, 421–444.
Landauer, T. K., &Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge.Psychological Review,104, 211–240.
Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., &Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship.Language & Cognitive Processes,18, 313–334.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., &Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon.Psychological Review,101, 3–33.
Niswander, E., Pollatsek, A., &Rayner, K. (2000). The processing of derived and inflected suffixed words during reading.Language & Cognitive Processes,15, 389–420.
Pastizzo, M. J., &Feldman, L. B. (2002). Discrepancies between orthographic and unrelated baselines in masked priming undermine a decompositional account of morphological facilitation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 244–249.
Plaut, D. C., &Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to language processing?Language & Cognitive Processes,15, 445–485.
Rastle, K., &Davis, M. [H.] (2003). Reading morphologically complex words: Some thoughts from masked priming. In S. Kinoshita & S. J. Lupker (Eds.),Masked priming: State of the art (pp. 279–305). New York: Psychology Press.
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., &Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time course study.Language & Cognitive Processes,15, 507–538.
Rueckl, J. G., &Raveh, M. (1999). The influence of morphological regularities on the dynamics of a connectionist network.Brain & Language,68, 110–117.
Seidenberg, M. S. (1987). Sublexical structures in visual word recognition: Access units or orthographic redundancy? In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance 12: The psychology of reading (pp. 245–263). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stanners, R. F., Neiser, J. J., Hernon, W. P., &Hall, R. (1979). Memory representation for morphologically related words.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 399–412.
Taft, M. (1994). Interactive activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing.Language & Cognitive Processes,9, 271–294.
Taft, M., &Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval for prefixed words.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,14, 638–647.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rastle, K., Davis, M.H. & New, B. The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11, 1090–1098 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196742
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196742