Property inference from heads to opaque-transparent compounds

References

1. Carstairs-McCarthy, A.
   (2010) The evolution of morphology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Clark, E. V.
   (1993) The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554377
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554377 [Google Scholar]
3. Connolly, A. C., Fodor, J. A., Gleitman, L. R., & Gleitman, H.
   (2007) Why stereotypes don’t even make good defaults. Cognition, 103, 1–22. 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.02.005
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.02.005 [Google Scholar]
4. Gagné, C. L. & Spalding, T. L.
   (2011) Inferential processing and meta-knowledge as the bases for property attribution in combined concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 176–192. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.005
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.03.005 [Google Scholar]
5. Gagné, C. L. & Spalding, T. L.
   (2014) Subcategorisation, not uncertainty, drives the modification effect. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 29:10, 1283–1294. 10.1080/23273798.2014.911924
   https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2014.911924 [Google Scholar]
6. Gagné, C. L. & Spalding, T. L.
   (2015) Semantics, concepts, and meta-cognition: Attributing properties and meanings to complex concepts. InBauer, Körtvélyessy, & Stekauer (Eds.), Semantics of Complex Words. (pp.9–25). New York: Springer.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Schmidtke, D.
   (2019) LADEC: Large database of English compounds. Behavior Research Methods, 51(5), 2152–2179. 10.3758/s13428‑019‑01282‑6
   https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01282-6 [Google Scholar]
8. Hampton, J. A.
   (1987) Inheritance of attributes in natural concept conjunctions. Memory & Cognition, 15, 55–71. 10.3758/BF03197712
   https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197712 [Google Scholar]
9. Hampton, J. A.
   (1991) The combination of prototype concepts. InP. J. Schwanenflugal (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Hampton, J. A., Passanisi, A., & Jönsson, M. L.
    (2011) The modifier effect and property mutability. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 233–248. 10.1016/j.jml.2010.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.12.001 [Google Scholar]
11. Ji, H., Gagne, C. L. & Spalding, T. L.
    (2011) Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(4), 406–430. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003 [Google Scholar]
12. Jönsson, M. L. & Hampton, J. A.
    (2008) On prototypes as defaults (comment onConnolly, Fodor, Gleitman, and Gleitman 2007), Cognition, 106, 913–923. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.02.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.02.009 [Google Scholar]
13. Jönsson, M. L. & Hampton, J. A.
    (2012) The modifier effect in within-category induction: Default inheritance in complex noun phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 90–116. 10.1080/01690965.2010.544107
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.544107 [Google Scholar]
14. Keuleers, E. & Brysbaert, M.
    (2010) Wuggy: a multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 627–633. 10.3758/BRM.42.3.627
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.627 [Google Scholar]
15. Kuperman, V. & Bertram, R.
    (2013) Moving spaces: Spelling alternation in English noun-noun compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 939–966. 10.1080/01690965.2012.701757
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.701757 [Google Scholar]
16. Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T.
    (1997) A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211. 10.1037/0033‑295X.104.2.211
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.211 [Google Scholar]
17. Libben, G.
    (1998) Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: Consequences for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, 61(1), 30–44. 10.1006/brln.1997.1876
    https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1876 [Google Scholar]
18. Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M.
    (2017) Explaining human performance in psycholinguistic tasks with models of semantic similarity based on prediction and counting: A review and empirical validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 57–78. 10.1016/j.jml.2016.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.04.001 [Google Scholar]
19. Markman, E. M.
    (1989) Categorization and naming in children: Problems of induction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Murphy, G. L.
    (2002) The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
21. Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., López, A., & Shafir, E.
    (1990) Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97(2), 185–200. 10.1037/0033‑295X.97.2.185
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.2.185 [Google Scholar]
22. Spalding, T. L., & Gagné, C. L.
    (2015) Property attribution in combined concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 41(3), 693–707.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Spalding, T. L., Gagné, C. L., Nisbet, K., Chamberlain, J. & Libben, G.
    (2019) If birds have sesamoid bones, do blackbirds have sesamoid bones? The modification effect with known compound words. Frontiers in Psychology: Section Language Sciences, 10:1570. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01570
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01570 [Google Scholar]
24. StataCorp
    StataCorp (2017) Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station: StataCorp LP.