Cover not available
Article published In:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 15:3 (2020) ► pp.485–507

Does stress matter?

An investigation of Greek compound processing

 | Université de Montréal | Centre de Recherche - Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal (CRIUGM)
 | Université de Montréal | Centre de Recherche - Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal (CRIUGM)
 | McGill University | Jewish Rehabilitation Hospital | Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation (CRIR)
This study investigates the effect of stress change during compound processing in Modern Greek. Twenty-five native speakers were tested in a cross-modal lexical decision task and a naming task in order to test for performance differences across stress-change vs. non-stress-change compounds. No statistically significant difference was found for the lexical decision task. However, the naming task showed a significant effect of stress change in compound processing, with the production of non-stress-change compounds showing facilitation. These results indicate that stress change is reflected in compound processing in Greek and underscore the importance of considering the interplay between specific tasks and the computational role of linguistic features.
Keywords: lexical processing, compounds, Greek, stress change
Article outline
  • The role of stress cues in language processing
  • Stress and morphological properties of Greek compounds
  • The present study
  • Experiment 1 – visual lexical decision with auditory priming
    • Method
      • Participants
      • Stimuli
      • Procedure
      • Data analysis
    • Results and discussion
  • Experiment 2 – primed naming
    • Method
      • Participants
      • Stimuli
      • Procedure
      • Data analysis
    • Results and discussion
  • General discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 January 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.19016.tsi
References (84)
References
Anastasiadi-Symeonidi, A. (2003). Reverse Dictionary of Modern Greek [Antistrofo Leksiko tis Neas Ellinikis] Thessaloniki: Institute of Modern Greek Studies/Manois Triantafyllidis Foundation [Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon/Idrima Manoli Triantafyllidi].Google Scholar
Apostolouda, V. (2012). Nominal Stress in Greek: an experimental approach [O Tonismos ton Ousiastikon tis Ellinikis: mia peimatiki proseggisi]. (MA thesis), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Arciuli, J., & Cupples, L. (2006). The processing of lexical stress during visual word recognition: Typicality effects and orthographic correlates. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(5), 920–948. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Would you rather ‘embert a cudsert’ or ‘cudsert an embert’? How spelling patterns at the beginning of English disyllables can cue grammatical category. In A. C. Schalley & D. Khlentzos (Eds.), Mental states, Volume 2: Language and cognitive structure. (pp. 213–238). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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, 59(4), 390–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., & Millin, P. (2010). Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(3), 12–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balota, D. A., Aschenbrenner, A. J., & Yap, M. J. (2013). Additive effects of word frequency and stimulus Quality: the influence of trial history and data transformations. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 39(5), 1563–1571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(2), 283–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., & Cortese, M. J. (2012). Megastudies: What do millions (or so) of trials tell us about lexical processing? Visual word recognition: Models and methods, orthography and phonology, Vol. 1 (pp. 90–115). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Browman, C. P. (1978). Tip of the tongue and slip of the ear : implications for language processing. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 421.Google Scholar
Brown, R., & McNeill, D. (1966). The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5(4), 325–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burzio, L. (1994). Principles of English Stress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language Production (pp. 257–294). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10(5), 425–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chitiri, H.-F., & Willows, D. M. (1994). Word recognition in two languages and orthographies: English and Greek. Memory & Cognition, 22(3), 313–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25(2), 257–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooper, N., Cutler, A., & Wales, R. (2002). Constraints of Lexical Stress on Lexical Access in English: evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and Speech, 45(3), 207–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortese, M. J., & Khanna, M. M. (2007). Age of acquisition predicts naming and lexical-decision performance above and beyond 22 other predictor variables. An analysis of 2,342 words, 60(8), 1072–1082. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A. (1980). Errors of stress and intonation. In V. Fromkin (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance : slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand (pp. 67–80). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1986). Forbear is a homophone: Lexical prosody does not constrain lexical Access. Language and Speech, 29(3), 201–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A., & Clifton, C. (1984). The use of prosodic information in word recognition. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X : control of language processes (pp. 183–196). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cutler, A., & Foss, D. J. (1977). On the role of sentence stress in sentence processing. Language and Speech, 20(1), 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dufour, S. (2008). Phonological priming in auditory word recognition: When both controlled and automatic processes are responsible for the effects. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 62(1), 33–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dumay, N., Benraïss, A., Barriol, B., Colin, C., Radeau, M., & Besson, M. (2001). Behavioral and electrophysiological study of phonological priming between bisyllabic spoken words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13(1), 121–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrand, L., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., New, B., Bonin, P., Méot, A., … Pallier, C. (2011). Comparing word processing times in naming, lexical decision, and progressive demasking: evidence from Chronolex. Frontiers in psychology, 21, 306–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Institute of Modern Greek Studies (Manolis Trantafylliidis Foundation) [Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon (Manolis Triantafyllidis Foundation)] (1998). Dictionary of Standard Modern Greek [Lexiko tis Koinis Neoellinikis], Thessaloniki: Aristotle University.Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A., Napps, S. E., & Feldman, L. (1985). Relations among regular and irregular morphologically related words in the lexicon as revealed by repetition priming. Memory & Cognition, 13(3), 241–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fromkin, V. A. (1973). Speech errors as linguistic evidence. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2009). Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory and Language, 60(1), 20–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gow, D. W., & Gordon, P. C. (1993). Coming to terms with stress: Effects of stress location in sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(6), 545–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hatzigeorgiu, N., Spiliotopoulou, A., Vacalopoulou, A., Papakostopoulou, A., Piperidis, S., Gavriilidou, M., & Karagiannis, G. (2001). National Thesaurus of Hellenic Texts (NTHL): Online Modern Greek Corpus [Ethikos Thisavros Ellinikon Keimenon (ETHEG): Soma Keimenon Tis Neas Ellinikis Sto Diadiktio]. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 211, 812–821.Google Scholar
Jarema, G., Busson, C., Nikolova, R., Tsapkini, K., & Libben, G. (1999). Processing compounds: a cross-linguistic study. Brain and Language, 68(1), 362–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jesse, A., Poellmann, K., & Kong, Y.-Y. (2017). English listeners use suprasegmental cues to lexical stress early during spoken-word recognition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR, 60(1), 190–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kappa, I. (2002). On the acquisition of syllabic structure in Greek. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 3(1), 1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kehayia, E., Jarema, G., Tsapkini, K., Perlak, D., Ralli, A., & Kadzielawa, D. (1999). The Role of morphological structure in the processing of compounds: The interface between linguistics and psycholinguistics. Brain and Language, 68(1), 370–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kehoe, M., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (1997). Truncation patterns in English-speaking children’s word productions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40(3), 526–541. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kelly, M. H. (2004). Word onset patterns and lexical stress in English. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(3), 231–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kelly, M. H., Morris, J., & Verrekia, L. (1998). Orthographic cues to lexical stress: Effects on naming and lexical decision. Memory & Cognition, 26(4), 822–832. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1982). Lexical morphology and phonology. In T. L. S. O. Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Selected papers from SICOL-1981 (pp. 4–91). Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Kohn, S. E., & Smith, K. L. (2008). Distinctions between two phonological output deficits. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15(1), 75–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehtonen, M., Niska, H., Wande, E., Niemi, J., & Laine, M. (2006). Recognition of inflected words in a morphologically limited language: Frequency effects in monolinguals and bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35(2), 121–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Libben, G. (1998). Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: consequences for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, 61(1), 30–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). Why study compound processing? An overview of the issues. In G. Libben & G. Jarema (Eds.), The Representation and Processing of Compound Words (pp. 1–22). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Libben, G., Derwing, B. L., & de Almeida, R. G. (1999). Ambiguous novel compounds and models of morphological parsing. Brain and Language, 68(1), 378–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorch, R. F., Balota, D. A., & Stamm, E. G. (1986). Locus of inhibition effects in the priming of lexical decisions: pre- or postlexical access? Memory & Cognition, 14(2), 95–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malikouti-Drachman, A., & Drachman, G. (1989). Tonismos sta Ellinika [Stress in Greek]. Studies in Greek Linguistics (9), 127–143.Google Scholar
Marelli, M., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2017). Compounding as abstract operation in semantic space: Investigating relational effects through a large-scale, data-driven computational model. Cognition, 1661, 207–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., Zhou, X., & Ford, M. (1997). Morphology, modality, and lexical architecture. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996 (pp. 117–134). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mcqueen, J. M., & Sereno, J. (2005). Cleaving automatic processes from strategic biases in phonological priming. Memory & Cognition, 33(7), 1185–1209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakatani, L. H., & Schaffer, J. A. (1978). Hearing ’’words’’ without words: Prosodic cues for word perception. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 63(1), 234–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napps, S. E. (1989). Morphemic relationships in the lexicon: Are they distinct from semantic and formal relationships? Memory & Cognition, 17(6), 729–739. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, M., & Ralli, A. (1994). Stress domains in Greek compounds: A case of morphology-phonology interaction. In I. Philippaki-Warburton, K. Nicolaidis & M. Sifianou (Eds.), Themes in Greek Linguistics: Papers from the First International Conference on Greek Linguistics, Reading, September 1993 (pp. 201–208). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). Morphology-phonology interface: Phonological domains in Greek compounds. The Linguistic Review, 13(3–4), 357–382.Google Scholar
Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2002). Bias effects in facilitatory phonological priming. Memory & Cognition, 30(3), 399–411. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ota, M. (2006). Input frequency and word truncation in child Japanese: structural and lexical effects. Language and Speech, 49(2), 261–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petrounias, E. (2002). Neoellinikí grammatikí kai sigkritikí análisi : Tomos A: Fonitikí kai eisagogí sti fonología [Modern Greek grammar and comparative analysis, Vol. A: Phonetics and introduction to phonology]. Thessaloniki: Ziti.Google Scholar
Plag, I., Kunter, G., & Lappe, S. (2007). Testing hypotheses about compound stress assignment in English: a corpus-based investigation Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory (Vol. 31, pp. 199). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, I., Kunter, G., Lappe, S., & Braun, M. (2008). The role of semantics, argument structure, and lexicalization in compound stress assignment in English. Language, 84(4), 760–794. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Protopapas, A. (2006). On the Use and Usefulness of Stress Diacritics in Reading Greek. Reading and Writing, 19(2), 171–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Protopapas, A., Gerakaki, S., & Alexandri, S. (2006). Lexical and default stress assignment in reading Greek. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 418–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Sources of information for stress assignment in reading Greek. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28(4), 695–720. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from [URL]
Radeau, M., Morais, J., & Segui, J. (1995). Phonological priming between monosyllabic spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(6), 1297–1311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ralli, A. (2000). A feature-based analysis of Greek nominal inflection. Glossologia, 11–121, 201–227.Google Scholar
(2007). I Sinthesi ton lekseon [Compounding of words]. Athina: Pattakis.Google Scholar
(2013). Compounding in Modern Greek. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ralli, A., & Tourantzidis, L. (1992). Computational processing of stress in Modern Greek [Ipologistiki Epeksergasia touTonismou tis Neas Ellinikis]. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 121, 273–289.Google Scholar
Revithiadou, A. (1999). Headmost accent wins : head dominance and ideal prosodic form in lexical accent systems. (PhD Diss.), Universiteit Leiden, The Hague.Google Scholar
Revithiadou, A., & Lengeris, A. (2016). One or many? In search of the default stress in Greek. In H. van der Hulst, J. Heinz & R. Goedemans (Eds.), Dimensions of Phonological Stress (pp. 263–290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandra, D. (1990). On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 42(3), 529–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 Associates.Google Scholar
Slowiaczek, L. M., McQueen, J. M., Soltano, E. G., & Lynch, M. (2000). Phonological representations in prelexical speech processing: Evidence from form-based priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 43(3), 530–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slowiaczek, L. M., Nusbaum, H. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1987). Phonological priming in auditory word recognition. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 13(1), 64–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spinelli, E., Segui, J., & Radeau, M. (2001). Phonological priming in spoken word recognition with bisyllabic targets. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16(4), 367–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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(4), 399–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15(6), 607–620. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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(1), 318–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tzakosta, M. (2009). Perceptual ambiguities in the formation of Greek compounds by native speakers. In G. K. Giannakis, M. Baltazani, G. I. Xydopoulos & T. Tsangalidis (Eds.), E-proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Greek Linguistics (8ICGL). Department of Philology: University of Ioannina.Google Scholar
(2011). L1 transfer in L2 learning: compound forms in the speech of Turkish learners of Greek. In E. Kitis, N. Lavidas, N. Topintzi & T. Tsangalidis (Eds.), Selected papers from the 19th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (pp. 459–468). Department of English Studies: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Tzakosta, M., & Mamadaki, M. (2013). Compound formation in L2 learning: the case of Bulgarian, Romanian and Russian learners of Greek. In Z. Gavriilidou, A. Efthymiou, E. Thomadaki & P. Kambakis-Vougiouklis (Eds.), The E-Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of Greek Linguistics (pp. 578–583). Komotini: Dimocritus University of Thrace.Google Scholar
Zharkova, N. (2005). Strategies in the acquisition of segments and syllables in Russian-speaking children. Leiden Papers in Linguistics, Special issue on Developmental Paths in Phonological Acquisition. M. Tzakosta, C. Levelt & J. van de Weijer (Eds). 2.1, 189–213.Google Scholar