1887
Volume 16, Issue 2-3
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Learning multimorphemic words involves the simultaneous learning of two hierarchically organized categories. In such words, sub-lexical units usually encode superordinate categories, whereas whole words encode exemplars of these categories. Complex, non-linear word structure is common in Semitic languages and can be used to probe the learning of multiple form-meaning associations. The aim of this study was to investigate how well Hebrew-speaking adults learn the dual form-meaning relationships that reflect different categorical levels following a few exposures to novel Hebrew-like words. Twenty-four native Hebrew-speakers were exposed to novel words through an interactive video story. Following a few exposures to the words, the learning of the exemplars was tested in a three-alternative-forced-choice identification test. The learning of the sub-lexical morphemes and the categories they encode were tested in generalization tests. The results show that a few exposures to novel, morphologically and conceptually complex words are sufficient to allow unsupervised simultaneous learning of two hierarchical categories even though the superordinate was not explicitly represented in the input.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.20030.oma
2022-03-08
2022-05-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ambridge, B.
    (2020a) Against stored abstractions: A radical exemplar model of language acquisition. First Language, 40 (5–6), 509–559. 10.1177/0142723719869731
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719869731 [Google Scholar]
  2. (2020b) Abstractions made of exemplars or ‘You’re all right, and I’ve changed my mind’: Response to commentators. First Language, 40 (5–6), 640–659. 10.1177/0142723720949723
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723720949723 [Google Scholar]
  3. Anglin, J. M.
    (1977) Word, object, and conceptual development.‏ Norton & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Aronoff, M.
    (2007) Language: Between words and grammar. In G. Jarema & G. Libben, G. (Eds.), The mental lexicon: Core perspectives (pp.55–79). Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bachra, B. N.
    (2001) The phonological structure of the verbal roots in Arabic and Hebrew (Vol.34). Brill. 10.1163/9789004348523
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004348523 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baldwin, D. A.
    (1993) Early referential understanding: Infants’ ability to recognize referential acts for what they are. Developmental Psychology, 29 (5), 832. 10.1037/0012‑1649.29.5.832
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.29.5.832 [Google Scholar]
  7. Banai, K. , Nir, B. , Moav-Scheff, R. , & Bar-Ziv, N.
    (2020) A role for incidental auditory learning in auditory-visual word learning among kindergarten children. Journal of Vision, 20 (3), 4–4. 10.1167/jovi.20.3.4
    https://doi.org/10.1167/jovi.20.3.4 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berman, R. A.
    (2003) Children’s lexical innovations. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 28 , 243–292. 10.1075/lald.28.13ber
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.28.13ber [Google Scholar]
  9. (2013) Modern Hebrew. In R. Hetzron (Ed.), The Semitic languages (pp.312–333). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Berman, R. , & Seroussi, B.
    (2011) Derived nouns in Modern Hebrew: Structural and psycholinguistic perspectives. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 23 (1), 105–125.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bloom, P.
    (2000) How children learn the meanings of words (Vol.377). MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/3577.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3577.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bloom, P. , & Markson, L.
    (1998) Capacities underlying word learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2 (2), 67–73. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(98)01121‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(98)01121-8 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen, C. H. , Zhang, Y. , & Yu, C.
    (2018) Learning object names at different hierarchical levels using cross-situational statistics. Cognitive Science, 42 , 591–605. 10.1111/cogs.12516
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12516 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gelman, S. A. , & O’Reilly, A. W.
    (1988) Children’s inductive inferences within superordinate categories: The role of language and category structure. Child Development, 59 (4), 876–887. 10.2307/1130255
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1130255 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gennari, S. P. , Sloman, S. A. , Malt, B. C. , & Fitch, W. T.
    (2002) Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83 (1), 49–79. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(01)00166‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00166-4 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goldinger, S. D.
    (1996) Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22 (5), 1166.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gupta, P.
    (2003) Examining the relationship between word learning, nonword repetition, and immediate serial recall in adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 56 (7), 1213–1236. 10.1080/02724980343000071
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000071 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hall, D. G.
    (1991) Acquiring proper nouns for familiar and unfamiliar animate objects: Two-year-olds’ word-learning biases. Child Development, 62 (5), 1142–1154. 10.2307/1131158
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1131158 [Google Scholar]
  19. Horton, M. S. , & Markman, E. M.
    (1980) Developmental differences in the acquisition of basic and superordinate categories. Child Development, 708–719. 10.2307/1129456
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1129456 [Google Scholar]
  20. Huang, Y. T. , & Arnold, A. R.
    (2016) Word learning in linguistic context: Processing and Memory Effects. Cognition, 156 , 71–87. 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.07.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.07.012 [Google Scholar]
  21. Jaeger, T. F.
    (2008) Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59 (4), 434–446. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 [Google Scholar]
  22. Labov, W.
    (1972) The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov , Language in The Inner City (pp.354–396). University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lieber, R.
    (2005) English word-formation processes. In P. Stekauer , & R. Lieber (Eds.), Handbook of word-formation (pp.375–427). Springer. 10.1007/1‑4020‑3596‑9_16
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3596-9_16 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lupyan, G.
    (2012) Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: the label-feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lupyan, G. , Rakison, D. H. , & McClelland, J. L.
    (2007) Language is not just for talking: Redundant labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18 (12), 1077–1083. 10.1111/j.1467‑9280.2007.02028.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02028.x [Google Scholar]
  26. Markman, A. B. , & Wisniewski, E. J.
    (1997) Similar and different: The differentiation of basic-level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23 (1), 54–70.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Mather, E. , & Plunkett, K.
    (2012) The role of novelty in early word learning. Cognitive Science, 36 (7), 1157–1177. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2012.01239.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01239.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Maxfield, J. T. , & Zelinsky, G. J.
    (2012) Searching through the hierarchy: How level of target categorization affects visual search. Visual Cognition, 20 (10), 1153–1163. 10.1080/13506285.2012.735718
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2012.735718 [Google Scholar]
  29. Markman, E. M. , & Wachtel, G. F.
    (1988) Children’s use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words. Cognitive Psychology, 20 (2), 121–157. 10.1016/0010‑0285(88)90017‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(88)90017-5 [Google Scholar]
  30. Mervis, C. B. , & Rosch, E.
    (1981) Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32 (1), 89–115. 10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000513
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000513 [Google Scholar]
  31. Minda, J. P. , Desroches, A. S. , & Church, B. A.
    (2008) Learning rule-described and non-rule-described categories: a comparison of children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34 (6), 1518–1533.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Moav-Scheff, R. , Yifat, R. , & Banai, K.
    (2015) Phonological memory and word learning deficits in children with specific language impairment: A role for perceptual context?. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 45 , 384–399. 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.010 [Google Scholar]
  33. Muchnik, M.
    (2017) Personal names in Modern Hebrew: A morphosyntactic and gender analysis. Folia Linguistica, 51 (2), 369–390. 10.1515/flin‑2017‑0013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2017-0013 [Google Scholar]
  34. Murphy, G.
    (2004) The big book of concepts. MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Murphy, G. L. , & Brownell, H. H.
    (1985) Category differentiation in object recognition: typicality constraints on the basic category advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11 (1), 70–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Murphy, G. L. , & Wisniewski, E. J.
    (1989) Categorizing objects in isolation and in scenes: What a superordinate is good for. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15 (4), 572–586.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Nazzi, T. , & Gopnik, A.
    (2001) Linguistic and cognitive abilities in infancy: When does language become a tool for categorization?. Cognition, 80 (3), B11–B20. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(01)00112‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00112-3 [Google Scholar]
  38. Nosofsky, R. M.
    (1986) Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115 (1), 39–57. 10.1037/0096‑3445.115.1.39
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.39 [Google Scholar]
  39. Ravid, D.
    (2003) A developmental perspective on root perception in Hebrew and Palestinian Arabic. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 28 , 293–320. 10.1075/lald.28.14rav
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.28.14rav [Google Scholar]
  40. (2006) Word-level morphology: A psycholinguistic perspective on linear formation in Hebrew nominals. Morphology, 16 (1), 127–148. 10.1007/s11525‑006‑0006‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-0006-2 [Google Scholar]
  41. Rosch, E. , Mervis, C. B. , Gray, W. D. , Johnson, D. M. , & Boyes-Braem, P.
    (1976) Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8 (3), 382–439. 10.1016/0010‑0285(76)90013‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X [Google Scholar]
  42. Rosenhouse, J.
    (2002) Personal names in Hebrew and Arabic: Modern trends compared to the past. Journal of Semitic Studies, 47 (1), 97–114. 10.1093/jss/47.1.97
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/47.1.97 [Google Scholar]
  43. Share, D. L.
    (1999) Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72 (2), 95–129. 10.1006/jecp.1998.2481
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1998.2481 [Google Scholar]
  44. Share, D. L. , & Shalev, C.
    (2004) Self-teaching in normal and disabled readers. Reading and Writing, 17 (7–8), 769–800. 10.1007/s11145‑004‑2658‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-004-2658-9 [Google Scholar]
  45. Shatil, N.
    (2006) The Hebrew noun system: A structural cognitive perspective. Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects, 68 , 243–282.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Shimron, J.
    (2003) Semitic languages: Are they really root-based?. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 28 , 1–28. 10.1075/lald.28.01shi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.28.01shi [Google Scholar]
  47. Sloat, C.
    (1969) Proper nouns in English. Language, 45 (1), 26–30. 10.2307/411749
    https://doi.org/10.2307/411749 [Google Scholar]
  48. Slobin, D. I.
    (2005) Linguistic representations of motion events: What is signifier and what is signified. In C. Maeder , O. Fischer , & W. Herlofsky (Eds.), Iconicity inside out: Iconicity in language and literature (pp.307–322). John Benjamins. 10.1075/ill.4.22slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.4.22slo [Google Scholar]
  49. Slobin, Dan. I.
    (2006) What makes manner of motion salient. Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. H. S. Robert (Ed.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories. John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.66.05slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.66.05slo [Google Scholar]
  50. Smith, L. B. , Jones, S. S. , & Landau, B.
    (1996) Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism?. Cognition, 60 (2), 143–171. 10.1016/0010‑0277(96)00709‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(96)00709-3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Stošić, D.
    (2013) Manner of motion, evaluative and pluractional morphology. Space in South Slavic. Oslo Studies in Language, 5 (1), 61–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Taft, M. , & Forster, K. I.
    (1975) Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14 , 638–647. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(75)80051‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-X [Google Scholar]
  53. Talmy, L.
    (1991) Path to realization: a typology of event integration. Buffalo Papers in Linguistics, 91 (1), 147–187.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Tamminen, J. , Davis, M. H. , Merkx, M. , & Rastle, K.
    (2012) The role of memory consolidation in generalisation of new linguistic information. Cognition, 125 (1), 107–112. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.014 [Google Scholar]
  55. Tamminen, J. , Davis, M. H. , & Rastle, K.
    (2015) From specific examples to general knowledge in language learning. Cognitive Psychology, 79 , 1–39. 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.03.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tomasello, M. , & Akhtar, N.
    (1995) Two-year-olds use pragmatic cues to differentiate reference to objects and actions. Cognitive Development, 10 (2), 201–224. 10.1016/0885‑2014(95)90009‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(95)90009-8 [Google Scholar]
  57. Waxman, S. R. , & Gelman, S. A.
    (2009) Early word-learning entails reference, not merely associations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13 (6), 258–263. 10.1016/j.tics.2009.03.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  58. Xu, F. , & Tenenbaum, J. B.
    (2007) Word learning as Bayesian inference. Psychological Review, 114 (2), 245. 10.1037/0033‑295X.114.2.245
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.245 [Google Scholar]
  59. Yablonski, M. , Ben-Shachar, M.
    (2018) The morpheme interference effect in Hebrew: A generalization across the verbal and domains. The Mental Lexicon, 11 (2),277–307. 10.1075/ml.11.2.05yab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.11.2.05yab [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ml.20030.oma
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.20030.oma
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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