1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. The Mental Lexicon
  4. Volume 18, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 18, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Two types of discontinuous morphemes are thought to be the basic building blocks of words in Semitic languages: roots and templates. However, the role of these morphemes in lexical access and representation is debated. Priming experiments, where reaction times to target words are predicted to be faster when preceded by morphologically-related primes compared to unrelated control primes, provide conflicting evidence bearing on this debate. We used meta-analysis to synthesise the findings from 229 priming experiments on 4710 unique Semitic speakers. With Bayesian modelling of the aggregate effect sizes, we found credible root and template priming in both nouns and verbs in Arabic and Hebrew. Our results show that root priming effects can be distinguished from the effects of overlap in form and meaning. However, more experiments are needed to determine if template priming effects can be distinguished from overlap in form and morphosyntactic function.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
2023-12-22
2025-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abu-Rabia, S. & Awwad, J.
    (2004) Morphological structures in visual word recognition: The case of Arabic. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(3), 321–336. 10.1111/j.1467‑9817.2004.00235.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00235.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Albright, A., & Hayes, B.
    (2003) Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition, 90(2), 119–161. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(03)00146‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00146-X [Google Scholar]
  3. Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y. Y., Shafaei-Bajestan, E., & Blevins, J. P.
    (2019) The discriminative lexicon: A unified computational model for the lexicon and lexical processing in comprehension and production grounded not in (de) composition but in linear discriminative learning. Complexity, vol.20191, Article 4895891. 10.1155/2019/4895891
     https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4895891 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bat-El, O.
    (1994) Stem modification and cluster transfer in Modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory, 121, 571–596. 10.1007/BF00992928
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992928 [Google Scholar]
  5. (2003) The fate of the consonantal root and the binyan in Optimality Theory. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes, (32), 31–60. 10.4000/rlv.442
     https://doi.org/10.4000/rlv.442 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bentin, S. & Feldman, L. B.
    (1990) The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to repetition priming at short and long lags: Evidence from Hebrew. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42(4), 693–711. 10.1080/14640749008401245
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749008401245 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bergmann, C., Tsuji, S., Piccinini, P. E., Lewis, M. L., Braginsky, M., Frank, M. C. & Cristia, A.
    (2018) Promoting replicability in developmental research through meta-analyses: Insights from language acquisition research. Child Development, 891, 1996–2009. 10.1111/cdev.13079
     https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13079 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berent, I. & Pinker, S.
    (2007) The dislike of regular plurals in compounds: Phonological or morphological?The Mental Lexicon, 2(2), 129–181. 10.1075/ml.2.2.03ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.2.2.03ber [Google Scholar]
  9. Blevins, J. P.
    (2016) Word and Paradigm Morphology. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593545.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Boudelaa, S. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (2000) Non-concatenative morphemes in language processing: Evidence from modern standard Arabic. InA. Cutler, J. McQueen, & R. Zondervan (Eds.), Proceedings of SWAP (Workshop on Spoken Word Access Processes) (vol.11, pp.23–26). Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2005) Discontinuous morphology in time: Incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1), 207–260. 10.1080/01690960444000106
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000106 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2011) Productivity and priming: Morphemic decomposition in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(4–6), 624–652. 10.1080/01690965.2010.521022
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.521022 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2013) Morphological structure in the Arabic mental lexicon: Parallels between standard and dialectal Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(10), 1453–1473. 10.1080/01690965.2012.719629
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.719629 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2015) Structure, form, and meaning in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Arabic. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(8), 955–992. 10.1080/23273798.2015.1048258
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1048258 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bürkner, P. C.
    (2017) brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of statistical software, 801, 1–28. 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bybee, J. & McClelland, J. L.
    (2005) Alternatives to the combinatorial paradigm of linguistic theory based on domain general principles of human cognition. The Linguistic Review, 22(2–4), 381–410. 10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2‑4.381
     https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2005.22.2-4.381 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chuang, Y. Y., Kang, M., Xuefeng, L., & Harald, B. R.
    (2021) Vector space morphology with linear discriminative learning. InD. Crepaldi (Ed.), Linguistic morphology in the mind and brain (pp.167–183). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Clahsen, H., Rothweiler, M., Woest, A. & Marcus, G.
    (1992) Regular and irregular inflection in the acquisition of German noun plurals. Cognition, 45(3), 225–255. 10.1016/0010‑0277(92)90018‑D
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90018-D [Google Scholar]
  19. Creemers, A., Davies, A. G., Wilder, R. J., Tamminga, M., & Embick, D.
    (2020) Opacity, transparency, and morphological priming: A study of prefixed verbs in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 1101, Article 104055. 10.1016/j.jml.2019.104055
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.104055 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cristia, A.
    (2018) Can infants learn phonology in the lab? A meta-analytic answer. Cognition, 1701, 312–327. 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.09.016
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.09.016 [Google Scholar]
  21. Deutsch, A., Frost, R. & Forster, K. I.
    (1998) Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(5), 1238–1255.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A. & Rayner, K.
    (2000) Early morphological effects in word recognition in Hebrew: Evidence from parafoveal preview benefit. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4–5), 487–506. 10.1080/01690960050119670
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119670 [Google Scholar]
  23. Deutsch, A., Frost, R., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K.
    (2005) Morphological parafoveal preview benefit effects in reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 341–371. 10.1080/01690960444000115
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000115 [Google Scholar]
  24. Dufour, S.
    (2008) Phonological priming in auditory word recognition: when both controlled and automatic processes are responsible for the effects. Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 62(1), 33–41. 10.1037/1196‑1961.62.1.33
     https://doi.org/10.1037/1196-1961.62.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  25. Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C.
    (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. British Medical Journal, 315(7109), 629–634. 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
     https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 [Google Scholar]
  26. Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W.
    (2000) Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory & Cognition, 28(8), 1277–1288. 10.3758/BF03211828
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211828 [Google Scholar]
  27. 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(4), 829–856.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Geary, J. A. & Ussishkin, A.
    (2018) Root-letter priming in Maltese visual word recognition. The Mental Lexicon, 13(1), 1–25. 10.1075/ml.18001.gea
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.18001.gea [Google Scholar]
  29. 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. 10.1037/0096‑3445.136.2.323
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.323 [Google Scholar]
  30. Harrer, M., Cuijpers, P., Furukawa, T., & Ebert, D. D.
    (2019) dmetar: Companion R Package for The Guide ‘Doing Meta-Analysis in R’ (Version 0.0. 9000) [Computer software]. dmetar.protectlab.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Heitmeier, M., Chuang, Y. Y., & Baayen, R. H.
    (2022) How trial-to-trial learning shapes mappings in the mental lexicon: Modelling Lexical Decision with Linear Discriminative Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.00430. 10.48550/arXiv.2207.00430
     https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.00430 [Google Scholar]
  32. Holes, C.
    (2004) Modern Arabic: Structures, functions, and varieties. Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kastner, I., Pylkkänen, L., & Marantz, A.
    (2018) The form of morphemes: MEG evidence from masked priming of two Hebrew templates. Frontiers in Psychology, 91. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02163
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02163 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kastner, I.
    (2019) Templatic morphology as an emergent property: Roots and functional heads in Hebrew. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 371, 571–619. 10.1007/s11049‑018‑9419‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9419-y [Google Scholar]
  35. Lüdecke, D.
    (2019) esc: effect size computation for meta analysis (Version 0.5.1) [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=esc
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lukatela, V., Gligorijević, B., Kostić, A., & Turvey, M. T.
    (1980) Representation of inflected nouns in the internal lexicon. Memory & Cognition, 8(5), 415–423. 10.3758/BF03211138
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211138 [Google Scholar]
  37. McCarthy, J. J.
    (1979) Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  38. Milin, P., Feldman, L. B., Ramscar, M., Hendrix, P., & Baayen, R. H.
    (2017) Discrimination in lexical decision. PLOS ONE, 12(2), Article e0171935. 10.1371/journal.pone.0171935
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171935 [Google Scholar]
  39. Nieder, J., Tomaschek, F., Cohrs, E., & de Vijver, R. V.
    (2022) Modelling Maltese noun plural classes without morphemes. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 37(3), 381–402. 10.1080/23273798.2021.1977835
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2021.1977835 [Google Scholar]
  40. Nieder, J., van de Vijver, R., & Mitterer, H.
    (2021) Priming Maltese plurals: Representation of sound and broken plurals in the mental lexicon. The Mental Lexicon, 16(1), 69–97. 10.1075/ml.20008.nie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.20008.nie [Google Scholar]
  41. Perea, M., Gotor, A., Rosa, E., & Algarabel, S.
    (1995) Time course of semantic activation for different prime-target pairs in the lexical decision task [Poster presentation]. The 36th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles, USA.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Prunet, J.
    (2006) External evidence and the Semitic root. Morphology, 16(1), 41–67. 10.1007/s11525‑006‑0003‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-0003-5 [Google Scholar]
  43. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Seidenberg, M. S. & Gonnerman, L. M.
    (2000) Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(9), 353–361. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(00)01515‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01515-1 [Google Scholar]
  45. Shadish, W. R., & Haddock, C. K.
    (2009) Combining estimates of effect size. InH. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp.257–277). Russell Sage Foundation.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Shalhoub-Awwad, Y.
    (2020) The role of nominal word pattern in Arabic reading acquisition: Insights from cross-modal priming. Scientific Studies of Reading, 24(4), 307–320. 10.1080/10888438.2019.1668396
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1668396 [Google Scholar]
  47. Shalhoub-Awwad, Y., & Leikin, M.
    (2016) The lexical status of the root in processing morphologically complex words in Arabic. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(4), 296–310. 10.1080/10888438.2016.1180525
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2016.1180525 [Google Scholar]
  48. Slowiaczek, L. M., & Hamburger, M. B.
    (1992) Prelexical facilitation and lexical interference in auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(6), 1239–1250.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Smolka, E., Libben, G., & Dressler, W. U.
    (2019) When morphological structure overrides meaning: Evidence from German prefix and particle verbs. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 34(5), 599–614. 10.1080/23273798.2018.1552006
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1552006 [Google Scholar]
  50. Smolka, E., Preller, K. H., & Eulitz, C.
    (2014) ‘Verstehen’ (‘understand’) primes ‘stehen’ (‘stand’): Morphological structure overrides semantic compositionality in the lexical representation of German complex verbs. Journal of Memory and Language, 721, 16–36. 10.1016/j.jml.2013.12.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M.
    (2001) Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 54(10), 1046–1055. 10.1016/S0895‑4356(01)00377‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00377-8 [Google Scholar]
  52. Sterne, J. A. C., & Harbord, R. M.
    (2004) Funnel plots in meta-analysis. The Stata Journal, 4(2), 127–141. 10.1177/1536867X0400400204
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0400400204 [Google Scholar]
  53. Stockall, L., & Marantz, A.
    (2006) A single route, full decompositional model of morphological complexity. The Mental Lexicon, 1(1), 85–123. 10.1075/ml.1.1.07sto
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.1.1.07sto [Google Scholar]
  54. Sundara, M., Zhou, Z. L., Breiss, C., Katsuda, H., & Steffman, J.
    (2021) Infants’ developing sensitivity to native language phonotactics: A meta-analysis. Cognition, 2211, 104993. 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104993
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104993 [Google Scholar]
  55. Taft, M.
    (1988) A morphological-decomposition model of lexical representation. Linguistics, 26(4), 657–667. 10.1515/ling.1988.26.4.657
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1988.26.4.657 [Google Scholar]
  56. (2004) Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 47(4), 745–765. 10.1080/02724980343000477
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000477 [Google Scholar]
  57. Taft, M., & Forster, K. I.
    (1975) Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verb Learning and Verb Behavior, 14(6), 638–647. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(75)80051‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-X [Google Scholar]
  58. Twist, A. E.
    (2006) A psycholinguistic investigation of the verbal morphology of Maltese [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arizona.
  59. Ussishkin, A.
    (1999) The inadequacy of the consonantal root: Modern Hebrew denominal verbs and output–output correspondence. Phonology, 16(3), 401–442. 10.1017/S0952675799003796
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675799003796 [Google Scholar]
  60. (2005) A fixed prosodic theory of nonconcatenative templatic morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23(1), 169–218. 10.1007/s11049‑003‑7790‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-003-7790-8 [Google Scholar]
  61. 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. 10.1080/23273798.2015.1005635
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1005635 [Google Scholar]
  62. Vasishth, S., Mertzen, D., Jäger, L. A., & Gelman, A.
    (2018) The statistical significance filter leads to overoptimistic expectations of replicability. Journal of Memory and Language, 1031, 151–175. 10.1016/j.jml.2018.07.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.07.004 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
Loading
A meta-analytic review of morphological priming in Semitic languages
The Mental Lexicon 18, 300 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.00024.xu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Bayesian modelling; roots; templates; word patterns

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error