Cover not available
Article published In:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 16:2/3 (2021) ► pp.240–270

Morphophonological activation in Chinese word recognition

Evidence from heteronymic characters

 | Hong Kong Baptist University
The role of morphophonology during Chinese visual word recognition was investigated in three masked priming lexical decision experiments. The primes and targets were Cantonese Chinese bimorphemic words. In Chinese, most characters correspond to morphemes, but sometimes the mapping between character and morpheme is not one-to-one. Specifically, some characters are heteronymic, which had one visual form associated with multiple pronunciations and meanings (e.g., “長” is pronounced as /coeng4/ and /zoeng2/ in Cantonese, which means “long” and “senior”, respectively). In Experiment 1, facilitative priming was found when the primes and targets shared heteronymic characters of identical (e.g., “長遠-long term” /coeng4jyun5/ and “長短-length” /coeng4dyun2/), but not a different, pronunciation (e.g., “長官-senior official” /zoeng2gun1/). Sharing word-level phonology only (e.g., “場景-scene” /coeng4ging2/) had no effects. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, and further indicated that the effects could not be attributed to sharing word-level meanings (e.g., “即時-immediate” /zik1si4/). Experiment 3 compared the priming effects produced by the two alternative pronunciations of the heteronymic characters. The results showed that the strength of priming was statistically comparable in the two pronunciation-congruent conditions. Together, this study provided evidence that morphophonology was activated to facilitate the ambiguity resolution of heteronymic characters. The lemma model was modified to accommodate the results.
Keywords: morphological processing, visual word recognition, Chinese, Cantonese, morpho-phonology, heteronymic morphemes
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Experiment 1
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Procedure
    • Results and discussion
  • Experiment 2
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Procedure
    • Results and discussion
  • Experiment 3
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Procedure
    • Results and discussion
  • General discussion
  • Limitations and future studies
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.21003.tsa
References (52)
References
Allen, M., & Badecker, W. (1999). Stem homograph inhibition and stem allomorphy: Representing and processing inflected forms in a multilevel lexical system. Journal of Memory and Language, 41 1, 105–123. 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, 3 1, 232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amenta, S., Marelli, M., & Crepaldi, D. (2015). The fruitless effort of growing a fruitless tree: Early morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic effects in sentence reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41 1, 1587–1596.Google 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 1, 390–412. 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 1, 255–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bertram, R., Laine, M., Baayen, R. H., Schreuder, R., & Hyönä, J. (2000). Affixal homonymy triggers full-form storage, even for inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language. Cognition, 74 1, B13–B25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., & Harald, R. (2000). The balance of storage and computation in morphological processing: The role of word formation type, affixal homonymy, and productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26 1, 489–511.Google Scholar
Beyersmann, E., Coltheart, M., & Castles, A. (2012). Parallel processing of whole words and morphemes in visual word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65 1, 1798–1819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bodner, G. E., & Masson, M. E. (2003). Beyond spreading activation: An influence of relatedness proportion on masked semantic priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10 1, 645–652. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cai, Q., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLoS ONE, 5 1, e10729. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, H. C., & Shu, H. (2001). Lexical activation during the recognition of Chinese characters: Evidence against early phonological activation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8 1, 511–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen-Goldberg, A. M., Cholin, J., Miozzo, M., & Rapp, B. (2013). The interface between morphology and phonology: Exploring a morpho-phonological deficit in spoken production. Cognition, 127 1, 270–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, M. H., & Rastle, K. (2010). Form and meaning in early morphological processing: Comment on Feldman, O’Connor, and Moscoso del Prado Martin (2009). Psychonomic bulletin & review, 17 1, 749–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2005). Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20 1, 75–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2008). Does darkness lead to happiness? Masked suffix priming effects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23 1, 1002–1020. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A. & Moscoso del Prado Martin, F. (2009). Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: A violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16 1, 684–691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiorentino, R., & Fund-Reznicek, E. (2009). Masked morphological priming of compound constituents. The Mental Lexicon, 4 1, 159–193. 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
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 1, 829–856.Google Scholar
Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8 1, 127–131. 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 1, 323–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyönä, J., Heikkilä, T., Vainio, S., & Kliegl, R. (2021). Parafoveal access to word stem during reading: An eye movement study. Cognition, 208 1, 104547. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyönä, J., Yan, M., & Vainio, S. (2018). Morphological structure influences the initial landing position in words during reading Finnish. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71 1, 122–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59 1, 434–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. (2017). lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of statistical software, 82 1, 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lavric, A., Clapp, A., & Rastle, K. (2007). ERP evidence of morphological analysis from orthography: A masked priming study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19 1, 866–877. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leybaert, J., & Alegría, J. (1995). Spelling development in deaf and hearing children: Evidence for use of morpho-phonological regularities in French. Reading and Writing, 7 1, 89–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2003 1, 313–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luke, S. G. (2017). Evaluating significance in linear mixed-effects models in R. Behavior Research Methods, 49 1, 1494–1502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marelli, M., & Baroni, M. (2015). Affixation in semantic space: Modeling morpheme meanings with compositional distributional semantics. Psychological Review, 122 1, 485–515. 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
Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of memory and language, 94 1, 305–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morris, J., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2013). Tracking the consequences of morpho-orthographic decomposition using ERPs. Brain Research, 1529 1, 92–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23 1, 942–971. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15 1, 507–537. 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 1, 1090–1098. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Research Centre for Humanities Computing (2003). Chinese character database: With word-formations. Retrieved from [URL]
Shen, W., Li, X., & Pollatsek, A. (2018). The processing of Chinese compound words with ambiguous morphemes in sentence context. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71 1, 131–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, M. (1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9 1, 271–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25 1, 277–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsang, Y. K., & Chen, H. C. (2013a). Early morphological processing is sensitive to morphemic meanings: Evidence from processing ambiguous morphemes. Journal of Memory and Language, 68 1, 223–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013b). Morpho-semantic processing in word recognition: Evidence from balanced and biased ambiguous morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39 1, 1990–2001.Google Scholar
(2014). Activation of morphemic meanings in processing opaque words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21 1, 1281–1286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsang, Y. K., Huang, J., Lui, M., Xue, M., Chan, Y. W. F., Wang, S., & Chen, H. C. (2018). MELD-SCH: A megastudy of lexical decision in simplified Chinese. Behavior Research Methods, 50 1, 1763–1777. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tse, C. S., Yap, M. J., Chan, Y. L., Sze, W. P., Shaoul, C., & Lin, D. (2017). The Chinese Lexicon Project: A megastudy of lexical decision performance for 25,000+ traditional Chinese two-character compound words. Behavior Research Methods, 49 1, 1503–1519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Bussche, E., Van den Noortgate, W., & Reynvoet, B. (2009). Mechanisms of masked priming: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 135 1, 452–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, A. W. K., Wu, Y. & Chen, H. C. (2014). Limited role of phonology in reading Chinese two-character compounds: Evidence from an ERP study. Neuroscience. 256 1, 342–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, Y., Tsang, Y. K., Wong, A. W. K., & Chen, H. C. (2017). The processing of homographic morphemes in Chinese: an ERP study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32 1, 102–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, J., & Taft, M. (2014). Solely soles: Inter-lemma competition in inflected word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 76 1, 127–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yan, M., Zhou, W., Shu, H., Yusupu, R., Miao, D., Krügel, A., & Kliegl, R. (2014). Eye movements guided by morphological structure: Evidence from the Uighur language. Cognition, 132 1, 181–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, X., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2000). The relative time course of semantic and phonological activation in reading Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26 1, 1245–1265.Google Scholar
Zhou, X., Marslen-Wilson, W., Taft, M., & Shu, H. (1999). Morphology, Orthography, and Phonology Reading Chinese Compound Words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 1, 525–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Chen, Huilin, Xu Xu, Haiquan Li, Xinyue Yu, Ruting Pan & Zhaoyang Zhang
2024. A database of ambiguous Chinese characters with measures for meaning dominance and meaning balance. Applied Psycholinguistics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Tsang, Yiu-Kei, Jian Huang, Suiping Wang, Jie Wang & Andus Wing-Kuen Wong
2024. Comparing word recognition in simplified and traditional Chinese: A megastudy approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 77:3 ► pp. 593 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.