Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:18:56.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological facilitation for regular and irregular verb formations in native and non-native speakers: Little evidence for two distinct mechanisms*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2009

LAURIE BETH FELDMAN ,
ALEKSANDAR KOSTIĆ ,
DANA M. BASNIGHT-BROWN ,
DUŠICA FILIPOVIĆ ĐURĐEVIĆ  and
MATTHEW JOHN PASTIZZO
LAURIE BETH FELDMAN*
Affiliation:
University at Albany, State University of New York, Haskins Laboratories
ALEKSANDAR KOSTIĆ
Affiliation:
University of Belgrade, Haskins Laboratories, Republic of Serbia
DANA M. BASNIGHT-BROWN
Affiliation:
University at Albany, State University of New York, Haskins Laboratories
DUŠICA FILIPOVIĆ ĐURĐEVIĆ
Affiliation:
University of Belgrade, Republic of Serbia
MATTHEW JOHN PASTIZZO
Affiliation:
State University of New York at Geneseo
*
Address for correspondence: Laurie Beth Feldman, Department of Psychology (SS 369), The University at Albany, SUNY, 1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222, USA[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The authors compared performance on two variants of the primed lexical decision task to investigate morphological processing in native and non-native speakers of English. They examined patterns of facilitation on present tense targets. Primes were regular (billed–bill) past tense formations and two types of irregular past tense forms that varied on preservation of target length (fell–fall; taught–teach). When a forward mask preceded the prime (Exp. 1), language and prime type interacted. Native speakers showed reliable regular and irregular length preserved facilitation relative to orthographic controls. Non-native speakers' latencies after morphological and orthographic primes did not differ reliably except for regulars. Under cross-modal conditions (Exp. 2), language and prime type interacted. Native but not non-native speakers showed inhibition following orthographically similar primes. Collectively, reliable facilitation for regulars and patterns across verb type and task provided little support for a processing dichotomy (decomposition, non-combinatorial association) based on inflectional regularity in either native or non-native speakers of English.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 119 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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.)

Footnotes

*

The research reported here was supported by funds from the National Institute Of Child Health and Development Grant HD-01994 to Haskins Laboratories and by funds from the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Belgrade. We thank Harald Clahsen and Judith Kroll for comments on an earlier draft.

References

Alegre, M. & Gordon, P. (1999). Frequency effects and the representational status of regular inflections. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, A. & Badecker, W. (2002). Inflectional regularity: Probing the nature of lexical representation in a cross-modal priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 705–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Feldman, L. B. & Schreuder, R. (2006). Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 496–512.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H. & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (2005). Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language, 81, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Wurm, L. H. & Aycock, J. (2007). Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities. The Mental Lexicon, 2 (3), 419–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basnight-Brown, D., Chen, H., Shu, H., Kostić, A. & Feldman, L. B. (2007). Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular English verbs: Does sensitivity to word form vary with language experience? Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradlow, A. R. & Bent, T. (2008). Perceptual adaptation to non-native speech. Cognition, 106, 707–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bueno, S. & Frenck-Mestre, C. (2002). Rapid activation of the lexicon: A further investigation with behavioral and computational results. Brain and Language, 81, 120–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., Sonnenstuhl, I. & Blevins, J. P. (2003). Derivational morphology in the German mental lexicon: A dual-mechanism account. In: Baayen, H. and Schreuder, R. (eds.), Morphological structure in language processing, pp. 125–155. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. J. & Lupker, S. J. (2006). Masked inhibitory priming in English: Evidence for lexical inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 668–687.Google ScholarPubMed
Davis, M. H., Meunier, F. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2004). Neural responses to morphological, syntactic, and semantic properties of single words: An fMRI study. Brain and Language, 89, 439–449.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duyck, W. & De Houwer, J. (2008). Semantic access in second-language visual word processing: Evidence from the semantic Simon paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15 (5), 961–966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duyck, W., Vanderelst, D., Desmet, T. & Hartsuiker, R. T. (2008). The frequency effect in second-language visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 850–855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B. & Basnight-Brown, D. M.,(2008). List context fosters semantic processing: Parallels between semantic and morphological facilitation when primes are forward masked. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 34, 680–687.Google ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B., O'Connor, P. A. & Martín, F. M. del P. (2009). Early morphological processing is morpho-semantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: An exception to form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychological Bulletin and Review, 16, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Rueckl, J., Pastizzo, M., Diliberto, K. & Vellutino, F. (2002). Morphological analysis in beginning readers as revealed by the fragment completion task. Psychological Bulletin and Review, 77, 529–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B. & Soltano, E. G. (1999). Morphological priming: The role of prime duration, semantic transparency, and affix position. Brain and Language, 68, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finkbeiner, M., Forster, K., Nicol, J. & Nakamura, K. (2004). The role of polysemy in masked semantic and translation priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I. (1999). The microgenesis of priming effects in lexical access. Brain and Language, 68, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forster, K. I. & Azuma, T. (2000). Masked priming for prefixed words with bound stems: Does submit prime permit? Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 539–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I. & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10 (4), 680–698.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., Davis, C., Schoknecht, C. & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 211–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, W. N. & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin.Google Scholar
Frost, R., Forster, K. I. & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23 (4), 829–856.Google ScholarPubMed
Gonnerman, L. M. (1999). Morphology and the lexicon: Exploring the semantic–phonology interface. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Gonnerman, L. M., Seidenberg, M. S. & Andersen, E. S. (2007). Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: Evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 323–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grainger, J., Colé, P. & Segui, J. (1991). Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 370–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, A. F., Barshi, I., Crutcher, R. J., Tao, L., Rickard, T. C., Marmie, W. R., Schneider, V. I., Feldman, A., Buck-Gengler, C. J., Romero, S. G., Sherrod, N. B., Parker, J. T. & Bourne, L. B. (1998). Toward the improvement of training in foreign languages. In Healy, A. F. & Bourne, L. E. (eds.), Foreign language learning, 3–53. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Holm, A. & Dodd, B. (1996). The effect of first written language on the acquisition of English literacy. Cognition, 59, 119–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, N. (1999). Testing processing explanations for the asymmetry in masked cross-language priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. & Forster, K. I. (2001). Cross-language priming asymmetries in lexical decision and episodic recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 32–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, E. S. & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kielar, A., Joanisse, M. F. & Hare, M. L. (2007). Priming English past tense verbs: Rules or statistics? Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotz, S. A. & Elston-Guttler, K. (2004).) The role of proficiency on processing categorical and associative information in the L2 as revealed by reaction times and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F. & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kucera, H. & Francis, N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Lehtonen, M. & Laine, M. (2003). How word frequency affects morphological processing in monolinguals and bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6 (3), 213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtonen, M., Niska, H., Wande, E., Niemi, J. & Laine, M. (2006). Recognition of inflected words in morphologically limited language: Frequency effects in monolinguals and bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 121–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R. & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101 (1), 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masson, M. E. J. & Isaak, M. I. (1999). Masked priming of words and nonwords in a naming task: Further evidence for a nonlexical basis for priming. Memory and Cognition, 27, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meunier, F. & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2004). Regularity and irregularity in French verbal inflection. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 561–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L. & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. www.usf.edu/FreeAssociation/.Google Scholar
Parodi, T., Schwartz, B. D. & Clahsen, H. (2004). On the L2 acquisition of the morphosyntax of German nominals. Linguistics, 42, 669–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pastizzo, M. J. & Feldman, L. B. (2002a). Discrepancies between orthographic and unrelated baselines in masked priming undermine a decompositional account of morphological facilitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28, 244–249.Google ScholarPubMed
Pastizzo, M. J. & Feldman, L. B. (2002b). Does prime modality influence morphological processing? Brain and Language, 81, 28–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of Language. Science, 253, 530–535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. & Ullman, M. (2002a). Combination and structure, not gradedness, is the issue: Reply to McClelland and Patterson. Trends in the Cognitive Sciences, 6 (11), 472–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. & Ullman, M. (2002b). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in the Cognitive Sciences, 6 (11), 456–462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portin, M., Lehtonen, M. & Laine, M. (2007). Processing of inflected nouns in late bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramscar, M. (2002). The role of meaning in inflection: Why the past tense does not require a rule. Cognition, 45, 45–94.Google Scholar
Rueckl, J. G., Mikolinski, M., Raveh, M., Miner, C. S. & Mars, F. (1997). Morphological priming, connectionist networks, and masked fragment completion. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 382–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rueckl, J. G. & Raveh, M. (1999). The influence of morphological regularities on the dynamics of a connectionist network. Brain and Language, 68, 110–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sánchez-Casas, R. M., Davis, C. W. & García-Albea, J. E. (1992). Bilingual lexical processing: Exploring the cognate/noncognate distinction. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4, 293–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreuder, R. & Baayen, R. H. (1997). How complex simplex words can be. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 118–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S. & Elman, L. M. (1999). Networks are not hidden rules. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S. & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 288–289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, R. & Clahsen, H. (2008). Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing: Evidence from masked priming experiments in English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverberg, S. & Samuel, A. G. (2004). The effect of age of second language acquisition on the representation and processing of second language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 381–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snodgrass, J. G. & Vanderwart, M. (1980). Norms for picture stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 174–215.Google Scholar
Sonnenstuhl, I., Eisenbeiss, S. & Clahsen, H. (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition, 72, 203–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanners, R. F., Neiser, J. J., Hernon, W. P. & Hall, R. (1979). Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stemberger, J. P. & MacWhinney, B. (1986). Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inflected forms. Memory and Cognition, 14, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stolz, J. A. & Feldman, L. B. (1995). The role of orthographic and semantic transparency of the base morpheme in morphological processing. In Feldman, L. B. (ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing, pp. 109–129. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Sunderman, G. & Kroll, J. F. (2006). First language activation during second language lexical processing: An investigation of lexical form, meaning, and grammatical class. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 387–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talamas, A., Kroll, J. F. & Dufour, R. (1999). Form related errors in second language learning: A preliminary stage in the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2 (1), 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsapkini, K., Jarema, G. & Kehayia, E. (2004). Regularity revisited: Modality matters. Brain and Language, 89, 611–616.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsapkini, K., Kehayia, E. & Jarema, G. (1999). Does phonological change play a role in the recognition of derived forms across modalities? Brain and Language, 68, 318–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, M. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4 (2), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Hell, J. G. (1998). Cross-language processing and bilingual memory organization. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar