Advertisement

Homophonous Regular Verb Forms With a Morphographic Spelling: Spelling Errors as a Window on the Mental Lexicon and Working Memory

  • Dominiek Sandra
Part of the Neuropsychology and Cognition book series (NPCO, volume 22)

Abstract

In contrast to all previous contributions to this book, the present chapter is not concerned with reading complex words. Rather, it focuses on the spelling of a subset of words which are complex at the morphological level, i.e., regularly inflected verb forms. The reason for including this chapter in a book on reading is to show that one can also learn interesting issues with respect to the mental lexicon by studying spelling rather than reading. This is not what one would think when going through the psycholinguistic literature on visual word processing. The literature indeed shows an immense imbalance between the attention for reading processes on the one hand and spelling processes on the other hand. Virtually no attention has been given to the latter (but see work by Assink, 1985, 1987; Fayol, Largy, & Lemaire, 1994; Largy, Fayol, & Lemaire, 1996). The present chapter shows that some interesting research issues arise exactly in the context of spelling and that a complete picture of processing visual words requires insight in spelling processes as well as reading processes.

Keywords

Word Form Mental Lexicon Spelling Error Orthographic Representation Intrusion Error 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, S. (1989). Frequency and neigbourhood size effects on lexical access: Activation or search? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 802–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Assink, E.M.H (1985). Assessing spelling strategies for the orthography of Dutch verbs. British Journalof Psychology, 76, 353–363.Google Scholar
  3. Assink, E.M.H (1987). Algorithms in Spelling Instruction: the Orthography of Dutch Verbs. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 79, 228–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baayen, R.H., Dijkstra,T. & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 94–117.Google Scholar
  5. Baayen, R.H., Piepenbrock, R. & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  6. Bowey, J.A., & Hansen, J. (1994). The development of orthographic rimes as units of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 58, 465–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carreiras, M., Alvarez, C.J., & de Vega, M. (1993). Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colé, P., Beauvillain, C. & Segui, J. (1989). On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coltheart, M. (1978). Lexical access in simple reading tasks. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Strategies of humaninformation processing. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Coltheart, M. & Rastle, K. (1994). Serial processing in reading aloud: Evidence for dual-route models of reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1197–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fayol, M., Largy, P., & Lemaire, P. (1994). Cognitive overload and orthographic errors: When cognitive overload enhances subject-verb agreement errors. A study in French written language. The QuarterlyJournal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 437–464.Google Scholar
  12. Forster, K.I., & Chambers, S.M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning andVerbal Behavior, 12, 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fromkin, V.A. (1971). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 51,696–719.Google Scholar
  14. Fromkin, V.A. (1993). Speech production. In J. Berko Gleason & N.B. Ratner (Eds.), Psycholinguistics, (pp. 272–301). Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  15. Garrett, M.F. (1980). Levels of processing in sentence production. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Languageproduction (Volume 1): Speech and talk, (pp. 177–220). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Garrett, M.F. (1982). Production of speech: Observations from normal and pathological language use. In A.W. Ellis (Ed.), Normality and pathology in cognitive junctions, (pp. 19–76). London: Academic press.Google Scholar
  17. Geudens, A., & Sandra, D. (in press). Orthographic subsyllabic patterns in Dutch beginning readers: The case of a transparent orthography. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors ofFunctional Literacy. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Press.Google Scholar
  18. Largy, P., Fayol, M., & Lemaire, P. (1996). The homophone effect in written French: The case of verb-noun inflection errors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 217–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A.S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Bain Sciences, 22, 1–75.Google Scholar
  20. Monsell, S. (1991). The nature and locus of word frequency effects in reading. In D. Besner & G.W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition, (pp. 148–197). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Sandra, D., Frisson, S., & Baayen, H. (in preparation). Interference effects of regular verb storage in the spelling of highly experienced readers and writers: Psycholinguistic evidence and simulation data.Google Scholar
  22. Sandra, D., Frisson, S., & Daems, Fr. (1999). Why simple verb forms can be so difficult to spell: the influence of homophone frequency and distance in Dutch. Brain and language, 68, 277–283.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Taft, M. (1979). Recognition of affixed words and the word frequency effect. Memory and Cognition, 7, 263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for PsycholinguisticsUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations