RELATION PRIMING AND COMPOUND PROCESSING IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
2
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study investigates online semantic integration patterns of second language (L2) speakers in processing familiar compounds in comparison with those of first language (L1) speakers. Particularly, adopting the Competition-Among-Relations-In-Nominals theory (Gagné & Shoben 1997, 2002) as a theoretical framework, this study examines whether L1 and L2 speakers demonstrate relation priming, in which previous exposure to a compound (e.g., tennis court) facilitates the processing of a subsequent compound (e.g., tennis shoes) which has the same first constituent and the same semantic relation. In an online lexical sense decision task, an L1 and an L2 group were asked to judge whether familiar compounds, operationalized as the existence in a large English corpus, had a sensible interpretation. Results revealed the effect of relation priming in both L1 and L2 group, indicating that a modifier in a compound plays a key role in online semantic integrations of two constituents in the compound. The finding also suggests that compound processing requires an obligatory process of selecting the interpretable relations between two nouns to establish a unified representation. An implication for the architecture of the lexicon was also discussed in relation to lexicalized and novel compounds.
Abstract
This study investigates online semantic integration patterns of second language (L2) speakers in processing familiar compounds in comparison with those of first language (L1) speakers. Particularly, adopting the Competition-Among-Relations-In-Nominals theory (Gagné & Shoben 1997, 2002) as a theoretical framework, this study examines whether L1 and L2 speakers demonstrate relation priming, in which previous exposure to a compound (e.g., tennis court) facilitates the processing of a subsequent compound (e.g., tennis shoes) which has the same first constituent and the same semantic relation. In an online lexical sense decision task, an L1 and an L2 group were asked to judge whether familiar compounds, operationalized as the existence in a large English corpus, had a sensible interpretation. Results revealed the effect of relation priming in both L1 and L2 group, indicating that a modifier in a compound plays a key role in online semantic integrations of two constituents in the compound. The finding also suggests that compound processing requires an obligatory process of selecting the interpretable relations between two nouns to establish a unified representation. An implication for the architecture of the lexicon was also discussed in relation to lexicalized and novel compounds.
참고문헌 (24)
- Baayen, H, "Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual route model", Journal of Memory and Language, 37, pp.94~117 (1997)
- Downing,P, "On the creation and use of English compound nouns", Language, 53, pp.810~842 (1977)
- Estes, Z, "Interactive property activation in conceptual combination", Memory & Cognition, 28, pp.28~34 (2000)
- Fiorentino, R, "Compound words and structure in the lexicon", Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, pp.1~48 (2007)
- Gagné,C.L, "Relation and lexical priming during the interpretation of noun-noun combinations", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, pp.236~254 (2001)
- Gagné,C.L, "Lexical and relational influences on the processing of novel compounds", Brain and Language, 81, pp.723~735 (2002)
- Gagné, C. L, "The influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun combinations", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, pp.71~87 (1997)
- Gagné, C. L, "Priming relation in ambiguous noun-noun combinations", Memory & Cognition, 30, pp.637~643 (2002)
- Gagné, C, "Effect of discourse context and modifier relation frequency on conceptual combination", Journal of Memory and Language, 50, pp.444~455 (2004)
- Gagné, C. L, "Relation availability was not confounded with familiarity or plausibility in Gagné and Shoben (1997): Comment on Wisniewski and Murphy (2005)", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, pp.1431~1437 (2005)
- Gagné, C. L, "Re-examining evidence for the use of independent relational representations during conceptual combination", Journal of Memory and Language (2005)
- Gerrig, R. J, "Contextual influences on the comprehension of complex concepts", Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, pp.205~230 (1992)
- Gleitman, L, "Phrase and paraphrase: Some innovative uses of language" (1970), Norton
- Jespersen,O, "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, vol. IV" (1942), Munksgaard
- Kay, P, "On the Semantics of Compounds and Genitives in English", Sixth California Linguistics Association Conference Proceedings, pp.29~35 (1976)
- Levi,J, "The syntax and semantics of complex nominals" (1978), Academic Press
- Libben,G, "Why study compounds: An overview of the issues. In: The representation and processing of compound words", pp.1~21 (2006), Oxford University Press
- Murphy,G.L, "Comprehending complex concepts", Cognitive Science, 12, pp.529~562 (1988)
- Murphy,G.L, "Noun phrase interpretation and conceptual combination", Journal of Memory and Language, 29, pp.259~288 (1990)
- Plag,I, "Word-formation in English" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Potter, M. C, "Understanding noun phrases", Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 18, pp.509~521 (1979)
- Shoben,E.J, "Predicting and nonpredicting combinations. In: The psychology of word meanings", pp.117~135 (1991), Erlbaum
- Springer, K, "Feature availability in conceptual combination", Psychological Science, 3, pp.111~117 (1992)
- Wisniewski,E.J, "Construal and similarity in conceptual combination", Journal of Memory and Language, 35, pp.434~453 (1996)