Cover not available
Article published In:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 15:2 (2020) ► pp.295–329

Variability and its limits in bilingual word recognition

A morphological priming study

ORCID logo | University of Potsdam
ORCID logo | University of Potsdam

This study examines the processing of morphologically complex words focusing on how morphological (in addition to orthographic and semantic) factors affect bilingual word recognition. We report findings from a large experimental study with groups of bilingual (Turkish/German) speakers using the visual masked-priming technique. We found morphologically mediated effects on the response speed and the inter-individual variability within the bilingual participant group. We conclude that the grammar (qua morphological parsing) not only enhances speed of processing in bilingual language processing but also yields more uniform performance and thereby constrains variability within a group of otherwise heterogeneous individuals.

Keywords: German, inflection, morphology, L2 processing, masked priming
Article outline
  • Previous research on morphological priming
  • The present study
  • Methods
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Procedure
    • Data analysis
  • Results
    • Priming effects
    • Variability effects
  • Discussion
    • Effects of morphological relatedness on response speed and variability
    • Mechanisms of morphological processing
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 6 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.20013.cla
References
Akamatsu, N.
(2008) The effects of training on automatization of word recognition in English as a foreign language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(2), 175–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amenta, S., & Crepaldi, D.
(2012) Morphological processing as we know it: An analytical review of morphological effects in visual word identification. Frontiers in Psychology, 31, 232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrews, S., & Lo, S.
(2013) Is morphological priming stronger for transparent than opaque words? It depends on individual differences in spelling and vocabulary. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 279–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2015) Package ‘lme4’. Available at: [URL]
Beyersmann, E., Casalis, S., Ziegler, J. C., & Grainger, J.
(2015) Language proficiency and morpho-orthographic segmentation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(4), 1054–1061. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bosch, S., Veríssimo, J., & Clahsen, H.
(2019) Inflectional morphology in bilingual language processing: An age-of-acquisition study. Language Acquisition, 26(3), 339–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., Sonnenstuhl, I., Hadler, M. & Eisenbeiss, S.
(2001) The mental representation of inflected words: an experimental study of adjectives and verbs in German. Language, 771: 510–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H.
(2016) Contributions of linguistic typology to psycholinguistics. Linguistic Typology 201: 599–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, C. E., & Tremblay, A.
(2015) Morphological decomposition in native and non-native French speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(3), 524–542. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. Council for Cultural Co-operation. Education Committee. Modern Languages Division
(2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
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, 63(1), 83–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. J.
(2005) N-Watch: A program for deriving neighborhood size and other psycholinguistic statistics. Behaviour Research Methods, 371, 65–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. J., & Bowers, J. S.
(2006) Contrasting five different theories of letter position coding: Evidence from orthographic similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(3), 535–557.Google Scholar
Farhy, Y., Veríssimo, J., & Clahsen, H.
(2018) Do late bilinguals access pure morphology during word recognition? A masked-priming study on Hebrew as a second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(5), 945–951. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Milin, P., Cho, K. W., Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., & O’Connor, P. A.
(2015) Must analysis of meaning follow analysis of form? A time course analysis. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 91, 111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Basnight-Brown, D. M., Đurđević, D. F., & Pastizzo, M. J.
(2010) Morphological facilitation for regular and irregular verb formations in native and non-native speakers: Little evidence for two distinct mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(2), 119–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & del Prado Martín, F. M.
(2009) Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: A violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 684–691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foote, R.
(2017) The storage and processing of morphologically complex words in L2 Spanish. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(4), 735–767. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C.
(2003) DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. C.
(2008) More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 787–814. DOI logoGoogle 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(2), 323–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grainger, J., & Beyersmann, E.
(2017) Edge-aligned embedded word activation initiates morpho-orthographic segmentation. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 671, 285–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harrington, M.
(2006) The lexical decision task as a measure of L2 lexical proficiency. EUROSLA Yearbook, 6(1), 147–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., Van Gelderen, A., & Schoonen, R.
(2009) Automatization in second language acquisition: What does the coefficient of variation tell us? Applied Psycholinguistics, 30(4), 555–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacob, G., Heyer, V., & Veríssimo, J.
(2018) Aiming at the same target: A masked priming study directly comparing derivation and inflection in the second language. International Journal of Bilingualism, 22(6), 619–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kielar, A., Joanisse, M. F., & Hare, M. L.
(2008) Priming English past tense verbs: Rules or statistics? Journal of Memory and Language, 58(2), 327–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, A. E., Oines, L., & Miyake, A.
(2018) Individual differences in verbal working memory underlie a tradeoff between semantic and structural processing difficulty during language comprehension: An ERP investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(3), 406–420.Google Scholar
Kırkıcı, B., & Clahsen, H.
(2013) Inflection and derivation in native and non-native language processing: Masked priming experiments on Turkish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(4), 776–791. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lim, H., & Godfroid, A.
(2015) Automatization in second language sentence processing: A partial, conceptual replication of Hulstijn, Van Gelderen, and Schoonen’s 2009 study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(5), 1247–1282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
(2007) Processes in language comprehension. In M. G. Gaskell, G. T. M. Altmann, G. Altmann, & P. Bloom (Eds), Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics, (495–524). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meunier, F., & Marslen-Wilson, W.
(2004) Regularity and irregularity in French verbal inflection. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(4), 561–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michael, E. B., & Gollan, T. H.
(2005) Being and becoming bilingual. In J. Kroll, & A. de Groot (Eds), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (389–407). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Neubauer, K., & Clahsen, H.
(2009) Decomposition of inflected words in a second language: An experimental study of German participles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(3), 403–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pastizzo, M. J., & Feldman, L. B.
(2002) 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(1), 244–249.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. A., Segalowitz, N., O’Brien, I., & Yamasaki, N.
(2004) Semantic priming in a first and second language: Evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17(2–3), 237–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., & New, B.
(2004) The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(6), 1090–1098. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., Lavric, A., Elchlepp, H., & Crepaldi, D.
(2015) Processing differences across regular and irregular inflections revealed through ERPs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(3), 747–760.Google Scholar
Rodgers, D. M.
(2011) The automatization of verbal morphology in instructed second language acquisition. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49(4), 295–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sassenhagen, J., & Alday, P. M.
(2016) A common misapplication of statistical inference: Nuisance control with null-hypothesis significance tests. Brain and Language, 1621, 42–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. S., & Segalowitz, S. J.
(1993) Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14(3), 369–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, S. J., Segalowitz, N. S., & Wood, A. G.
(1998) Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19(1), 53–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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(2), 245–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Solovyeva, K., & DeKeyser, R.
(2018) Response time variability signatures of novel word learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(1), 225–239. 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
Stockall, L., & Marantz, A.
(2006) A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: MEG evidence. The Mental Lexicon, 1(1), 85–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanner, D., & Van Hell, J. G.
(2014) ERPs reveal individual differences in morphosyntactic processing. Neuropsychologia, 561, 289–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
telc gGmbH (Hrsg.)
, Kompetenzcheck Deutsch Beruf A1/A2/B1/B2/C1. Frankfurt am Main 1. Auflage 2015.Google Scholar
Veríssimo, J.
(2018) Taking it a level higher: The LEIA model of complex word recognition. Poster presented at ‘Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing’ (AMLaP), Berlin, Germany.
Voga, M., Anastassiadis-Symeonidis, A., & Giraudo, H.
(2014) Does morphology play a role in L2 processing?: Two masked priming experiments with Greek speakers of ESL. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 37(2), 338–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagenmakers, E. J., & Brown, S.
(2007) On the linear relation between the mean and the standard deviation of a response time distribution. Psychological Review, 114(3), 830–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar