1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. The Mental Lexicon
  4. Volume 14, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 14, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The lexical or sub-lexical loci of facilitation of word production by phonological cueing/priming are debated. We investigate whether phonological cues facilitate word production at the level of lexical selection by manipulating the size of the cohort of word onsets matching the cue. In the framework of lexical facilitation, a phonological cue corresponding to a small number of words should be more effective than a cue corresponding to a larger cohort. However, a lexical locus can clearly be inferred only if the facilitation effect in picture naming is modulated by a specific grammatical lexical cohort and not by the overall word onset cohort. Twenty-seven healthy participants performed an object/noun (Exp1) and an action/verb (Exp2) naming task with cues corresponding to large/small noun/verb onset cohorts. Results revealed that facilitation was modulated by the lexical onset cohort size of the cue in the target grammatical category. These results favour the lexical hypothesis and further suggest a categorical organization of the lexicon.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
2019-11-11
2024-09-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abel, S., Dressel, K., Bitzer, R., Kümmerer, D., Mader, I., Weiller, C., & Huber, W.
    (2009) The separation of processing stages in a lexical interference fMRI-paradigm. Neuroimage, 44(3), 1113–1124. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.018
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.018 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abrams, L., White, K. K., & Eitel, S. L.
    (2003) Isolating phonological components that increase tip-of-the-tongue resolution. Memory & Cognition, 31(8), 1153–1162. 10.3758/BF03195798
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195798 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aichert, I., & Ziegler, W.
    (2004) Syllable frequency and syllable structure in apraxia of speech. Brain and language, 88(1), 148–159. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(03)00296‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00296-7 [Google Scholar]
  4. Alario, F.-X., & Ferrand, L.
    (1999) A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(3), 531–552. doi:  10.3758/BF03200732
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200732 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2014) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.5823.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Best, W., Herbert, R., Hickin, J., Osborne, F., & Howard, D.
    (2002) Phonological and orthographic facilitation of word-retrieval in aphasia: immediate and delayed effects. Aphasiology, 16 (1–2). pp.151–168. ISSN02687038. doi:  10.1080/02687040143000483
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02687040143000483 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bonin, P., Peereman, R., Malardier, N., Méot, A., & Chalard, M.
    (2003) A new set of 299 pictures for psycholinguistic studies: French norms for name agreement, image agreement, conceptual familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, age of acquisition, and naming latencies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 158–167. doi:  10.3758/BF03195507
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195507 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowles, N. L., & Poon, L. W.
    (1985) Effects of priming in word retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(2), 272–283. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.11.2.272
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.11.2.272 [Google Scholar]
  9. Canny, J.
    (1986) A Computational Approach to Edge Detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI- 8(6), 679–698. doi:  10.1109/TPAMI.1986.4767851
     https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1986.4767851 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cappa, S. F., Binetti, G., Pezzini, A., Padovani, A., Rozzini, L., & Trabucchi, M.
    (1998) Object and action naming in Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Neurology, 50(2), 351–355. 10.1212/WNL.50.2.351
     https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.50.2.351 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cholin, J., Levelt, W. J., & Schiller, N. O.
    (2006) Effects of syllable frequency in speech production. Cognition, 99(2), 205–235. 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.009 [Google Scholar]
  12. Damasio, A. R., & Tranel, D.
    (1993) Nouns and verbs are retrieved with differently distributed neural systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 90(11), 4957–4960. 10.1073/pnas.90.11.4957
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.90.11.4957 [Google Scholar]
  13. Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N.
    (2009) Exploring phonological encoding through repeated segments. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(5), 685–712. doi:  10.1080/01690960802351260
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802351260 [Google Scholar]
  14. Damian, M. F., & Martin, R. C.
    (1999) Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(2), 345–361. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.25.2.345
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.2.345 [Google Scholar]
  15. Damian, M. F., Martin, R. C., & Martin, I. C.
    (1999) Semantic and Phonological Codes Interact in Single Word Production.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. De Zubicaray, G. I., & McMahon, K. L.
    (2009) Auditory context effects in picture naming investigated with event-related fMRI. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 9(3), 260–269. doi:  10.3758/CABN.9.3.260
     https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.9.3.260 [Google Scholar]
  17. De Zubicaray, G. I., McMahon, K. L., Eastburn, M. M., & Wilson, S. J.
    (2002) Orthographic/Phonological Facilitation of Naming Responses in the Picture–Word Task: An Event-Related fMRI Study Using Overt Vocal Responding. NeuroImage, 16(4), 1084–1093. doi:  10.1006/nimg.2002.1135
     https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2002.1135 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dell, G. S.
    (1986) A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283–321. doi:  10.1037/0033‑295X.93.3.283
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dell, G. S., & O’Seaghdha, P. G.
    (1992a) Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42(1–3), 287–314. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(92)90046‑K
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90046-K [Google Scholar]
  20. (1992b) Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42(1–3), 287–314. doi:  10.1016/0010‑0277(92)90046‑K
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90046-K [Google Scholar]
  21. Dell, G. S., Schwartz, M. F., Martin, N., Saffran, E. M., & Gagnon, D. A.
    (1997) Lexical access in aphasic and nonaphasic speakers. Psychological Review, 104(4), 801–838. doi:  10.1037/0033‑295X.104.4.801
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.801 [Google Scholar]
  22. Dhooge, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J.
    (2010) The distractor frequency effect in picture–word interference: Evidence for response exclusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(4), 878–891. doi:  10.1037/a0019128
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019128 [Google Scholar]
  23. Druks, J.
    (2000) Object and action naming battery. Psychology Press. Consulté à l’adressediscovery.ucl.ac.uk/87465/
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Estes, W. K.
    (1955) Statistical theory of distributional phenomena in learning. Psychological review, 62(5), 369. 10.1037/h0046888
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046888 [Google Scholar]
  25. Farrell, M. T., & Abrams, L.
    (2014) Picture-word interference reveals inhibitory effects of syllable frequency on lexical selection. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006), 67(3), 525–541. doi:  10.1080/17470218.2013.820763
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.820763 [Google Scholar]
  26. Fox, N. P., Reilly, M., & Blumstein, S. E.
    (2015) Phonological neighborhood competition affects spoken word production irrespective of sentential context. Journal of memory and language, 83, 97–117. 10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  27. Freedman, J. L., & Landauer, T. K.
    (2014) Retrieval of long-term memory: “Tip-of-the-tongue” phenomenon. Psychonomic Science, 4(8), 309–310. doi:  10.3758/BF03342310
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03342310 [Google Scholar]
  28. Gahl, S., Yao, Y., & Johnson, K.
    (2012) Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech. Journal of memory and language, 66(4), 789–806. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.11.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.11.006 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gaskell, M. G., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (1997) Integrating form and meaning: A distributed model of speech perception. Language and cognitive Processes, 12(5–6), 613–656. 10.1080/016909697386646
     https://doi.org/10.1080/016909697386646 [Google Scholar]
  30. Goldrick, M., & Rapp, B.
    (2002) A restricted interaction account (RIA) of spoken word production: The best of both worlds. Aphasiology, 16(1–2), 20–55. 10.1080/02687040143000203
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02687040143000203 [Google Scholar]
  31. Grosjean, F., & Itzler, J.
    (1984) Can semantic constraint reduce the role of word frequency during spoken-word recognition?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22(3), 180–182. 10.3758/BF03333798
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333798 [Google Scholar]
  32. Heine, M. K., Ober, B. A., & Shenaut, G. K.
    (1999) Naturally occurring and experimentally induced tip-of-the-tongue experiences in three adult age groups. Psychology and Aging, 14(3), 445–457. doi:  10.1037/0882‑7974.14.3.445
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.14.3.445 [Google Scholar]
  33. Heller, J. R., & Goldrick, M.
    (2014) Grammatical constraints on phonological encoding in speech production. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 21(6), 1576–1582. 10.3758/s13423‑014‑0616‑3
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0616-3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hodgson, C., & Lambon Ralph, M. A.
    (2008) Mimicking aphasic semantic errors in normal speech production: Evidence from a novel experimental paradigm. Brain and Language, 104(1), 89–101. doi:  10.1016/j.bandl.2007.03.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.03.007 [Google Scholar]
  35. Jaeger, T. F., Furth, K., & Hilliard, C.
    (2012) Incremental Phonological Encoding during Unscripted Sentence Production. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00481
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00481 [Google Scholar]
  36. James, L. E., & Burke, D. M.
    (2000) Phonological priming effects on word retrieval and tip-of-the-tongue experiences in young and older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1378–1391. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.26.6.1378
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1378 [Google Scholar]
  37. Jescheniak, J. D., & Schriefers, H.
    (2001) Priming effects from phonologically related distractors in picture-word interference. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 371–382. doi:  10.1080/713755981
     https://doi.org/10.1080/713755981 [Google Scholar]
  38. Laganaro, M., & Alario, F.-X.
    (2006) On the locus of the syllable frequency effect in speech production. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(2), 178–196. 10.1016/j.jml.2006.05.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  39. Laganaro, M., Chetelat-Mabillard, D., & Frauenfelder, U. H.
    (2013) Facilitatory and interfering effects of neighbourhood density on speech production: Evidence from aphasic errors. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 30(3), 127–146. doi:  10.1080/02643294.2013.831818
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2013.831818 [Google Scholar]
  40. Levelt, W. J.
    (1999) Models of word production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(6), 223–232. doi:  10.1016/S1364‑6613(99)01319‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01319-4 [Google Scholar]
  41. Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S.
    (1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 1–38; discussion38–75. 10.1017/S0140525X99001776
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99001776 [Google Scholar]
  42. Levitt, A. G., & Healy, A. F.
    (1985) The roles of phoneme frequency, similarity, and availability in the experimental elicitation of speech errors. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(6), 717–733. 10.1016/0749‑596X(85)90055‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90055-5 [Google Scholar]
  43. Longe, O., Randall, B., Stamatakis, E. A., & Tyler, L. K.
    (2006) Grammatical categories in the brain: The role of morphological structure. Cerebral Cortex, 17(8), 1812–1820. 10.1093/cercor/bhl099
     https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhl099 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lüttmann, H., Zwitserlood, P., & Bölte, J.
    (2011) Sharing morphemes without sharing meaning: Production and comprehension of German verbs in the context of morphological relatives. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 65(3), 173. 10.1037/a0023794
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023794 [Google Scholar]
  45. Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (1987) Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition. Cognition, 25(1), 71–102. 10.1016/0010‑0277(87)90005‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(87)90005-9 [Google Scholar]
  46. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Welsh, A.
    (1978) Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10(1), 29–63. doi:  10.1016/0010‑0285(78)90018‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(78)90018-X [Google Scholar]
  47. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K.
    (1980) The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8(1), 1–71. 10.1016/0010‑0277(80)90015‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(80)90015-3 [Google Scholar]
  48. Marslen-Wilson, W., & Zwitserlood, P.
    (1989) Accessing spoken words: The importance of word onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 15(3), 576.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Mätzig, S., Druks, J., Masterson, J., & Vigliocco, G.
    (2009) Noun and verb differences in picture naming: Past studies and new evidence. Cortex, 45(6), 738–758. 10.1016/j.cortex.2008.10.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2008.10.003 [Google Scholar]
  50. Meyer, A. S., & Bock, K.
    (1992) The tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon: Blocking or partial activation?Memory & Cognition, 20(6), 715–726. doi:  10.3758/BF03202721
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202721 [Google Scholar]
  51. Meyer, A. S., & Schriefers, H.
    (1991) Phonological facilitation in picture-word interference experiments: Effects of stimulus onset asynchrony and types of interfering stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(6), 1146–1160. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.17.6.1146
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.6.1146 [Google Scholar]
  52. Miller, G. A.
    (1991) The science of words. Consulté à l’adressepubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:2364335/component/escidoc:2395675/Miller_1991_science_of_words.pdf
  53. Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A.
    (2003) When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(2), 228–252. doi:  10.1037/0096‑3445.132.2.228
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.228 [Google Scholar]
  54. Mirman, D., Kittredge, A. K., & Dell, G. S.
    (2010) Effects of near and distant phonological neighbors on picture naming. InProceedings of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol.32). Consulté à l’adresseescholarship.org/uc/item/5620c08n.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Mirman, D., Strauss, T. J., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S.
    (2010) Effect of representational distance between meanings on recognition of ambiguous spoken words. Cognitive Science, 34(1), 161–173. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2009.01069.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01069.x [Google Scholar]
  56. New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L.
    (2004) Lexique 2 : A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 516–524. doi:  10.3758/BF03195598
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195598 [Google Scholar]
  57. Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A.
    (2000) Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(03), 299–325. 10.1017/S0140525X00003241
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00003241 [Google Scholar]
  58. Nusbaum, H. C., Pisoni, D. B., & Davis, C. K.
    (1984) Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words. Research on speech perception progress report, 10(10), 357–376.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Oldfield, R. C., & Wingfield, A.
    (1965) Response latencies in naming objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17(4), 273–281. 10.1080/17470216508416445
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470216508416445 [Google Scholar]
  60. Peterson, R. R., & Savoy, P.
    (1998) Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(3), 539–557. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.24.3.539
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.539 [Google Scholar]
  61. Pisoni, A., Cerciello, M., Cattaneo, Z., & Papagno, C.
    (2017) Phonological facilitation in picture naming: When and where? A tDCS study. Neuroscience, 352, 106–121. doi:  10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.03.043
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.03.043 [Google Scholar]
  62. Posnansky, C. J., & Rayner, K.
    (1977) Visual-Feature and Response Components in a Picture – Word Interference Task with Beginning and Skilled Readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 10.1016/0022‑0965(77)90090‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(77)90090-X [Google Scholar]
  63. Protopapas, A.
    (2007) CheckVocal: a program to facilitate checking the accuracy and response time of vocal responses from DMDX. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 859–862. 10.3758/BF03192979
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192979 [Google Scholar]
  64. Roelofs, A.
    (1992) A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition, 42(1–3), 107–142. 10.1016/0010‑0277(92)90041‑F
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90041-F [Google Scholar]
  65. (1997) The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production. Cognition, 64(3), 249–284. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(97)00027‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00027-9 [Google Scholar]
  66. (2003) Modeling the relation between the production and recognition of spoken word forms. Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities, 115–158.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. (2004) Seriality of phonological encoding in naming objects and reading their names. Memory & Cognition, 32(2), 212–222. doi:  10.3758/BF03196853
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196853 [Google Scholar]
  68. (2005) 3 Spoken word planning, comprehending, and self-monitoring: Evaluation ofWEAVER+. Phonological encoding and monitoring in normal and pathological speech, 42.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & M, J.
    (1996) Interaction between semantic and orthographic factors in conceptually driven naming: Comment on Starreveld and La Heij (1995). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(1), 246–251. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.22.1.246
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.1.246 [Google Scholar]
  70. Sadat, J., Martin, C. D., Costa, A., & Alario, F. X.
    (2014) Reconciling phonological neighborhood effects in speech production through single trial analysis. Cognitive psychology, 68, 33–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A.
    (2002) E-Prime reference guide. ittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Schriefers, H., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M.
    (1990) Exploring the time course of lexical access in language production: Picture-word interference studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(1), 86–102. doi:  10.1016/0749‑596X(90)90011‑N
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90011-N [Google Scholar]
  73. Schwitter, V., Boyer, B., Méot, A., Bonin, P., & Laganaro, M.
    (2004) French normative data and naming times for action pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 564–576. doi:  10.3758/BF03195603
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195603 [Google Scholar]
  74. Starreveld, P. A.
    (2000) On the Interpretation of Onsets of Auditory Context Effects in Word Production. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(4), 497–525. doi:  10.1006/jmla.1999.2693
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2693 [Google Scholar]
  75. Starreveld, P. A., & La Heij, W.
    (1995) Semantic interference, orthographic facilitation, and their interaction in naming tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(3), 686–698. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.21.3.686
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.686 [Google Scholar]
  76. (1996) Time-course analysis of semantic and orthographic context effects in picture naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(4), 896–918. doi:  10.1037/0278‑7393.22.4.896
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.4.896 [Google Scholar]
  77. Tyler, L. K., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D.
    (1977) The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(6), 683–692. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(77)80027‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80027-3 [Google Scholar]
  78. Vigliocco, G., & Hartsuiker, R. J.
    (2002) The interplay of meaning, sound, and syntax in sentence production. Psychological bulletin, 128(3), 442. 10.1037/0033‑2909.128.3.442
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.442 [Google Scholar]
  79. Vitevitch, M. S.
    (1997) The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms. Language and Speech, 40(3), 211–228. 10.1177/002383099704000301
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099704000301 [Google Scholar]
  80. (2002) The influence of phonological similarity neighborhoods on speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(4), 735.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A.
    (1999) Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(3), 374–408. 10.1006/jmla.1998.2618
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2618 [Google Scholar]
  82. (2005) Increases in phonotactic probability facilitate spoken nonword repetition. Journal of memory and language, 52(2), 193–204. 10.1016/j.jml.2004.10.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.10.003 [Google Scholar]
  83. Vitevitch, M. S., & Sommers, M. S.
    (2003) The facilitative influence of phonological similarity and neighborhood frequency in speech production in younger and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 31(4), 491–504. 10.3758/BF03196091
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196091 [Google Scholar]
  84. Wunderlich, A., & Ziegler, W.
    (2011) Facilitation of picture-naming in anomic subjects: Sound vs mouth shape. Aphasiology, 25(2), 202–220. doi:  10.1080/02687038.2010.489255
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2010.489255 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
Loading
Phonological and grammatical class cohorts in word production
The Mental Lexicon 14, 68 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.18008.pel
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): facilitation; language production; lexical; phonological; picture naming

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