In a visual lexical decision task, recognition is shown in two experiments to be harder for possessional
adjectives that look like they are inflected verbs (e.g., talented) than for genuine inflected verbs (e.g.,
consulted), especially when the nonword distractors have real-word stems (e.g., infanted).
Such a result implies that inflected words do not have a form-based whole word representation, but are recognized when functional
information associated with their stem and affix is recombined after decomposition. A third experiment goes on to demonstrate that
the addition of the verb suffix -ing to the noun stem of such pseudo-verb-stem words (i.e.,
talenting) leads to more erroneous classifications as a real word than when the stem is another type of noun
(e.g., infanting). Moreover, a negative correlation is observed between the accuracy of recognition of the
pseudo-verb-stem words and the classification as a nonword of the -ing version of their stems. On the basis of
these experiments, a model is proposed in which a pseudo-verb-stem word is recognized through a lexical representation of its stem
that corresponds to a bound ornative verb and which is different to the representation used to recognize its free-standing noun
version.
Adams, V. (2014). Complex words in English. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis eBooks.
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 591, 390–412.
Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Filipovic Durdevic, D., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 1181, 438–481.
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2000). The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homophony, and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 261, 489–511.
Brysbaert, M., New, B., & Keuleers, E. (2012). Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 441, 991–997.
Burani, C., Dovetto, F. M., Spuntarelli, A., & Thornton, A. M. (1999). Morpholexical access and naming: The semantic interpretability of new root–suffix combinations. Brain and Language, 681, 333–339.
Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., Coltheart, M., & Nickels, L. (2010). ‘Fell’ primes ‘fall’, but does ‘bell’ prime ‘ball’? Masked priming with irregularly-inflected primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 631, 83–99.
Diependaele, K., Morris, J., Serota, R. M., Bertrand, D., & Grainger, J. (2013). Breaking boundaries: Letter transpositions and morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(7), 988–1003.
Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., & Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 1251, 777–799.
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 351, 116–124.
Hirtle, W. H. (1970). -Ed Adjectives like ‘verandahed’ and ‘blue-eyed’. Journal of Linguistics, 61, 19–36.
Hudson, R. A. (1975). Problems in the analysis of ed-adjectives. Journal of Linguistics, 111, 69–72.
Jespersen, 0. (1954). A Modern English Grammar, Parts II and VI. London: Allen & Unwin.
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P., & Christensen, R. (2014). LmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models. R package, version 2.0–3.
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 221, 1–38.
Longtin, C. M. and Meunier, F. (2005). Morphological decomposition in early visual word processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 26–41.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (2007). Morphology, language and the brain: The decompositional substrate for language comprehension. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 3621, 823–836.
Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1995). Modeling morphological processing. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 131–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assocs.
Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 91, 271–294.
Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A1, 745–765.
Taft, (2015). The nature of lexical representation in visual word recognition. In A. Pollatsek, & R. Treiman (Eds.) Handbook on Reading. Pp. 99–113. New York: Oxford University Press.
Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 141, 638–647.
Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick: The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 251, 277–296.
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., and Cappa, S. F. (2011). Nouns and verbs in the brain? A review of behavioural, electrophysiological and imaging studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 351, 407–426.