Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:17:09.384Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accessing grammatical gender in German: The impact of gender-marking regularities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2006

ANNETTE HOHLFELD
ANNETTE HOHLFELD
Affiliation:
Humboldt University, Berlin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study investigated whether German speakers compute grammatical gender on the basis of gender-marking regularities. To this purpose two experiments were run. In Experiment 1, participants had to assign the definite article to German nouns in an online task; in the second experiment, participants were confronted with German nouns as well as nonwords in an untimed gender assignment task. In the online experiment, which required the repetition of a visually presented noun with its corresponding definite article as fast as possible, reaction times show that the assignment of the definite determiner to a noun is not facilitated by gender-marking regularities. In an offline gender assignment task, however, participants profited from gender cues during gender assignment to nonwords.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 127 - 142
Copyright
2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baayen R. H., Piepenbrock R., & van Rijn H.1995. The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
Badecker W., Miozzo M., & Zanutti R.1995. The two-stage model of lexical retrieval: Evidence from a case of anomia with selective preservation of grammatical gender. Cognition, 57, 193– 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates E., Devescovi A., Hernandez A., & Pizzaniglio L.1996. Gender priming in Italian. Perception and Psychophysics, 58, 992– 1004.Google Scholar
Bates E., Devescovi A., & Pizzaniglio L.1995. Gender and lexical access in Italian. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 847– 862.Google Scholar
Bauch H. J.1971. Zum Informationsgehalt der Kategorie Genus im Deutschen, Englischen und Polnischen. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock, Gesellschafts-und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, XX. Jahrgang, Heft 6. Rostock, Germany: Universität Rostock.
DeBleser R., & Bayer J.1988. On the role of inflectional morphology in agrammatism. In M. Hammond & N. Noonan (Eds.), Theoretical morphology (pp. 45– 69). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Desrochers A., & Paivio A.1990. Le phonem initial des noms inanimes et son effet sur l'identification du genre grammatical. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44 44– 57.Google Scholar
Eisenberg P.1994. Grundriss der Deutschen Grammatik. Stuttgart: Weimar.
Fries N.1997. Die hierarchische Organisation grammatischer Kategorien. Sprachtheorie und Germanistische Linguistik, 7.Google Scholar
Gollan T., & Frost R.2001. Two routes to grammatical gender: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 627– 651.Google Scholar
Gregor B.1983. Das Genus englischer Lehnwörter im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Jescheniak J., & Levelt W. J. M.1994. Word frequency effects in speech production. Retrieval of syntactic information and phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, Cognition, 20, 824– 843.Google Scholar
Köpcke K. M.1982. Untersuchungen zum Genussystem der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Köpcke K. M., & Zubin D.1983. Die kognitive Organisation der Genuszuweisung zu den einsilbigen Nomen der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 11, 166– 182.Google Scholar
Köpcke K. M., & Zubin D.1984. Sechs Prinzipien für die Genuszuweisung im Deutschen. Ein Beitrag zur natürlichen Klassifikation. Linguistische Berichte, 93, 26– 50.Google Scholar
Levelt W. J. M.1989. Speaking. From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Levelt W. J. M., Roelofs A., & Meyer A. S.1999. A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1– 75.Google Scholar
MacWhinney B., Leinbach J., Taraban R., & McDonald J. L.1989. Language learning: Cues or rules? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 255– 277.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson W. 1990. Activation, competition and frequency in lexical access. In G. T. M Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 148– 172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mills A.1986. The acquisition of gender: A study of English and German. Berlin: Springer.
Miozzo M., & Caramazza A.1997. The retrieval of lexical–syntactic features in tip-of-the-tongue states. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, Cognition, 23, 1410– 1423.Google Scholar
Roelofs A. 1992. A spreading activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition, 42, 107– 142.Google Scholar
Schmitt B. M., Lamers M., & Münte T.2002. Electrophysiological estimates of biological and syntactic gender violation during pronoun processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 14, 333– 346.Google Scholar
Schriefers H., & Jescheniak J.1999. Representation and processing of grammatical gender in language production: A review. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 575– 600.Google Scholar
Schriefers H., Jescheniak J., & Hantsch A.2002. Determiner selection in noun phrase production. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, Cognition, 28, 941– 950.Google Scholar
Siegel S.1997. Nichtparametrische statistische Methoden. Eschborn, Germany: Verlag Dietmar Klotz GmbH.
Taft M., & Meunier F.1998. Lexical representation of gender: A quasiregular domain. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 23– 45.Google Scholar
Vigliocco G., Antonini T., & Garrett M. F.1997. Grammatical gender is on the tip of Italian tongues. Psychological Science, 8, 314– 317.Google Scholar