Article published in:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 16:1 (2021) ► pp. 133164
References

References

Baayen, H. R., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H.
(2001) WebCelex. Online resource. Retrieved from http://​celex​.mpi​.nl
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J.
(2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2014) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://​CRAN​.R​-project​.org​/package​=lme4
Black, M., & Chiat, S.
(2003) Noun-verb dissociations: a multi-faceted phenomenon. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 16, 231–250. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blazej, L. J., & Cohen-Goldberg, A. M.
(2015) Can we hear morphological complexity before words are complex? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(1), 50–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D.
(2016) Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://​www​.praat​.org
Bürki, A., Ernestus, M., & Frauenfelder, U. H.
(2010) Is there only one “fenêtre” in the production lexicon? On-line evidence on the nature of phonological representations of pronunciation variants for French schwa words. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(4), 421–437. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, C., & Kang, S.
(2018) Flexible perceptual sensitivity to acoustic and distributional cues. The Mental Lexicon, 13(1), 38–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conwell, E.
(2015) Neural responses to category ambiguous words. Neuropsychologia, 69, 85–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017) Token Frequency Effects in Homophone Production: An Elicitation Study. Language and Speech, 23830917737108. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conwell, E., & Morgan, J. L.
(2012) Is It a Noun or Is It a Verb? Resolving the Ambicategoricality Problem. Language Learning and Development, 8(2), 87–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M.
(2014) The Corpus of Contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–2012.Google Scholar
Ernestus, M.
(2000) Voice assimilation and segment reduction in casual Dutch, a corpus-based study of the phonology-phonetics interface. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
(2014) Acoustic reduction and the roles of abstractions and exemplars in speech processing. Lingua, 142, 27–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldinger, S. D.
(1996) Auditory Lexical Decision. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11(6), 559–568. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1997) Words and Voices: Perception and Production in an Episodic Lexicon. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Talker variability in speech processing (pp. 33–66). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kemps, R. [Rachel], Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, H. R.
(2005) Prosodic cues for morphological complexity: The case of Dutch plural nouns. Memory & Cognition, 33(3), 430–446. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kemps, R. [Rachèl], Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, H.
(2004) Processing reduced word forms: The suffix restoration effect. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 117–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M.
(2010) Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 627–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kisler, T., Reichel, U., & Schiel, F.
(2017) Multilingual processing of speech via web services. Computer Speech and Language, 45, 326–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B.
Lahiri, A., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
(1991) The mental representation of lexical form: A phonological appraoch to the recognition lexicon. Cognition, 38, 245–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lohmann, Arne
(2020) Nouns and verbs in the speech signal: Are there phonetic correlates of grammatical category? Linguistics 58(6), 1877–1911. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McQueen, J. M.
(2005) Speech Perception. In K. Lamberts & R. L. Goldstone (Eds.), Handbook of cognition (pp. 255–275). London: SAGE. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mitterer, H., & McQueen, J. M.
(2009) Processing reduced word-forms in speech perception using probabilistic knowledge about speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 35(1), 244–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nearey, T. M.
(2001) Phoneme-like units and speech perception. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16(5–6), 673–681. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J.
(2001) Exemplar dynamics: Word frequency, lenition and contrast. In J. Bybee & P. J. Hopper (Eds.), Typological studies in language: v. 45. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure (pp. 137–157). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Politzer-Ahles, S., & Piccinini, P.
(2018) On visualizing phonetic data from repeated measures experiments with multiple random effects. Journal of Phonetics, 70, 56–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
(2014) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing} [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://​www​.R​-project​.org/
Ranbom, L., & Connine, C.
(2007) Lexical representation of phonological variation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(2), 273–298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salverda, A. P., Dahan, D., & McQueen, J. M.
(2003) The role of prosodic boundaries in the resolution of lexical embedding in speech comprehension. Cognition, 90(1), 51–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A.
(2015) E-Prime Professional (Version 2.0) [Computer software]. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Schweitzer, K., Walsh, M., Calhoun, S., Schütze, H., Möbius, B., Schweitzer, A., & Dogil, G.
(2015) Exploring the relationship between intonation and the lexicon: Evidence for lexicalised storage of intonation. Speech Communication, 66, 65–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seyfarth, S., Garellek, M., Gillingham, G., Ackerman, F., & Malouf, R.
(2017) Acoustic differences in morphologically-distinct homophones. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 88(2), 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shatzman, K. B., & McQueen, J. M.
(2006) Prosodic knowledge affects the recognition of newly acquired words. Psychological Science, 17(5), 372–377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, J. M., Cooper, W. E., & Paccia, J. M.
(1978) Speech timing of grammatical categories. Cognition, 6(2), 135–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sóskuthy, M., & Hay, J.
(2017) Changing word usage predicts changing word durations in New Zealand English. Cognition, 166, 298–313. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, B. V.
(2011) The effect of reduction on the processing of flaps and /g/ in isolated words. Journal of Phonetics, 39(3), 312–318. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, B. V., Brenner, D., Danielson, D. K., Kelley, M. C., Nenadić, F., & Sims, M.
(2019) The Massive Auditory Lexical Decision (MALD) database. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1187–1204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turk, A. E., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S.
(2007) Multiple targets of phrase-final lengthening in American English words. Journal of Phonetics, 35(4), 445–472. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ussishkin, A., Dawson, C. R., Wedel, A., & Schluter, K.
(2015) Auditory masked priming in Maltese spoken word recognition. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(9), 1096–1115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., & Cappa, S. F.
(2011) Nouns and verbs in the brain: A review of behavioural, electrophysiological, neuropsychological and imaging studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(3), 407–426. CrossrefGoogle Scholar