1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. The Mental Lexicon
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Is there a hip or a pie in hippie?
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Pseudo-compound words (e.g., ) are words that look like compound words (e.g., ) but, in fact, do not have the morphemic structure of a compound word. For instance, the pseudo-compound word has and embedded in it, but they do not function as morphemes. Pseudo-compound words vary in terms of phonological transparency. Some, such as , are phonologically transparent because the pronunciations of and are maintained when these pseudo-constituents become part of . In contrast, the pseudo-compound word is phonologically opaque because the pronunciations of and change when they are embedded in . Previous studies have demonstrated that compound words go through morphological decomposition and attempts at meaning construction during written production tasks. For instance, compound words are not output as single units during typing tasks, but rather are typed in chunks based on their morphology (e.g., is typed in two parts: first as and then as ), which results in an increase in typing latencies at the morpheme boundary (i.e., between the last letter of the first constituent and first letter of the second constituent). The same is true for pseudo-compound words, even though these words do not have the morphemic structure of a compound word. Given that previous research has shown that the morphological decomposition of compound words during typing tasks looks different depending on the semantic transparency of the compound word’s constituents (i.e., the degree to which the meaning of each constituent of a compound word contributes to the word’s overall meaning), we wanted to examine whether the level of phonological transparency of the pseudo-constituents of a pseudo-compound word influences typing latencies at the pseudo-morpheme boundary.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.24009.par
2025-04-08
2025-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ml.24009.par
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Blevins, J.
    (2006) Word-based morphology. Journal of Linguistics, , –. 10.1017/S0022226706004191
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226706004191 [Google Scholar]
  2. Blumenthal-Dramé, A.
    (2012) Entrenchment in usage-based theories: What corpus data do and do not reveal about the mind. De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110294002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110294002 [Google Scholar]
  3. Booij, G. E.
    (2005) Compounding and derivation: Evidence for Construction Morphology. InW. U. Dressler, F. Rainer, D. Kastovsky, & O. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Morphology and its Demarcations (pp.–). John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.264.08boo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.264.08boo [Google Scholar]
  4. Booij, G.
    (2010) Construction morphology. Language and Linguistics Compass, , –. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2010.00213.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00213.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Bowers, J. S., Davis, C. J., & Hanley, D. A.
    (2005) Automatic semantic activation of embedded words: Is there a “hat” in “that”?Journal of Memory and Language, (), –. 10.1016/j.jml.2004.09.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brooks, T. L., & Cid de Garcia, D.
    (2015) Evidence for morphological composition in compound words using MEG. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, , . 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00215
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00215 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brysbaert, M., & New, B.
    (2009) Moving beyond Kuçera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977 [Google Scholar]
  8. Chamberlain, J. M., Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Lõo, K.
    (2020) Detecting spelling errors in compound and pseudocompound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Dell, G. S.
    (1986) A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, (), –. 10.1037/0033‑295X.93.3.283
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dressler, W. U.
    (1985) Morphonology: The dynamics of derivation. Karoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M.
    (2007) The role of the frequency of constituents in compound words: Evidence from Basque and Spanish. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, (), –. 10.3758/BF03193108
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193108 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fabb, N.
    (1998) Compounding. InA. Spencer, & A. Zwicky (Eds.), The handbook of morphology (pp.–). Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Ferro, M., Cardillo, F. A., Pirrelli, Gagné C. L., & Spalding, T. L.
    (2016) Written word production and lexical self-organisation: Evidence from English (pseudo)compounds. Proceedings of the Third Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics, , Article 10.2. 10.4000/books.aaccademia.1775
     https://doi.org/10.4000/books.aaccademia.1775 [Google Scholar]
  14. Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D.
    (2007a) Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, (), –. 10.1080/01690960701190215
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701190215 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2007b) Processing of compound words: An MEG study. Brain and Language, (), –. 10.1016/j.bandl.2007.07.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2007.07.009 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gagné, C., & Spalding, T.
    (2014) Typing time as an index of morphological and semantic effects during English compound processing. Lingue e Linguaggio, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L.
    (2016a) Effects of morphology and semantic transparency on typing latencies in English compound and pseudocompound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L.
    (2016b) Written production of English compounds: effects of morphology and semantic transparency. Morphology, , –. 10.1007/s11525‑015‑9265‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-015-9265-0 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Nisbet, K.
    (2017) Processing English compounds: Investigating semantic transparency. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., Nisbet, K. A., & Armstrong, C.
    (2018) Pseudo-morphemic structure inhibits, but morphemic structure facilitates, processing of a repeated free morpheme. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, (), –. 10.1080/23273798.2018.1470250
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1470250 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Schmidtke, D.
    (2019) LADEC: The large database of English compounds. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/s13428‑019‑01282‑6
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01282-6 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Taikh, A.
    (2023) Carport and carpet: Effects of compound and pseudo-compound word structures on typing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hasenäcker, J., & Schroeder, S.
    (2019) Compound reading in German: Effects of constituent frequency and whole-word frequency in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyönä, J., & Pollatsek, A.
    (2000) Processing of Finnish compound words in reading. InA. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp.–). North-Holland/Elsevier Science Publishers. 10.1016/B978‑008043642‑5/50006‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043642-5/50006-1 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ji, H., Gagné, 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, , –. 10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  26. Juhasz, B. J.
    (2007) The influence of semantic transparency on eye movements during English compound word recognition. InR. von Gompel, W. Murray, & M. Fischer (Eds.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp.–). Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑008044980‑7/50018‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044980-7/50018-5 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2008) The processing of compound words in English: Effects of word length on eye movements during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, (), –. 10.1080/01690960802144434
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802144434 [Google Scholar]
  28. Juhasz, B. J., & Berkowitz, R. N.
    (2011) Effects of morphological families on English compound word recognition: A multitask investigation. Language and Cognitive Processes, (), –. 10.1080/01690965.2010.498668
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.498668 [Google Scholar]
  29. Juhasz, B., Lai, Y., & Woodcock, M. L.
    (2015) A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience. Behavior Research Methods, , –. 10.3758/s13428‑014‑0523‑6
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0523-6 [Google Scholar]
  30. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S.
    (1999) A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (), –. 10.1017/S0140525X99001776
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99001776 [Google Scholar]
  31. Libben, G.
    (1998) Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: Consequence for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, (), –. 10.1006/brln.1997.1876
     https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1876 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2005) Everything is psycholinguistics: Material and methodological considerations in the study of compound processing. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique, , –. 10.1017/S000841310000373X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S000841310000373X [Google Scholar]
  33. (2010) Compound words, semantic transparency, and morphological transcendence. Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. (2014) The nature of compounds: A psychocentric perspective. Cognitive Neuropsychology, (), –. 10.1080/02643294.2013.874994
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2013.874994 [Google Scholar]
  35. Libben, G., Gallant, J., & Dressler, W. U.
    (2021) Textual effects in compound processing: A window on words in the world. Frontiers in Communication, . 10.3389/fcomm.2021.646454
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.646454 [Google Scholar]
  36. Libben, G., Gibson, M., Yoon, Y. B., & Sandra, D.
    (2003) Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, (), –. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(02)00520‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00520-5 [Google Scholar]
  37. Libben, G., & Weber, S.
    (2014) Semantic transparency, compounding, and the nature of independent variables. InF. Rainer, W. Dressler, F. Gardani & H. C. Luschutzky (Eds.), Morphology and meaning. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.327.14lib
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.327.14lib [Google Scholar]
  38. Libben, G., Weber, S., & Miwa, K.
    (2012) P3: A technique for the study of perception, production, and participant properties. The Mental Lexicon, (), –. 10.1075/ml.7.2.05lib
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.7.2.05lib [Google Scholar]
  39. Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L.
    (1994) Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, (), –. 10.1037/0033‑295X.101.1.3
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  40. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (10th ed.)
    Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (10th ed.) (1999) Merriam-Webster Incorporated.
  41. Nikolaev, A., Ashaie, S., Hallikainen, M., Hänninen, T., Higby, E., Hyun, J., Lehtonen, M., & Soininen, H.
    (2019) Effects of morphological family on word recognition in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease. Cortex, , –. 10.1016/j.cortex.2018.10.028
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.10.028 [Google Scholar]
  42. Park, J., Sana, F., Gagné, C., & Spalding, T.
    (2020) Is inhibition involved in the comprehension of opaque compound words? A study of individual differences. The Mental Lexicon, (), –. 10.1075/ml.19011.par
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.19011.par [Google Scholar]
  43. Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M.
    (2000) Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4419‑0318‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0318-1 [Google Scholar]
  44. Plag, I.
    (2006) The variability of compound stress in English: structural, semantic, and analogical factors. English Language and Linguistics, (), –. 10.1017/S1360674306001821
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674306001821 [Google Scholar]
  45. Plag, I., & Kunter, G.
    (2010) Constituent family size and compound stress assignment in English, Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Plag, I., Kunter, G., & Lappe, S.
    (2007) Testing hypotheses about compound stress assignment in English: A corpus-based investigation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, (), –. 10.1515/CLLT.2007.012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/CLLT.2007.012 [Google Scholar]
  47. Plag, I., Kunter, G., Lappe, S., & Braun, M.
    (2008) The role of semantics, argument structure, and lexicalization in compound stress assignment in English. Language, , –. 10.1353/lan.0.0072
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0072 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sahel, S., Nottbusch, G., Grimm, A., & Weingarten, R.
    (2008) Written production of German compounds: Effects of lexical frequency and semantic transparency. Written Language & Literacy, (), –. 10.1075/wll.11.2.06sah
     https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.11.2.06sah [Google Scholar]
  49. Sandra, D.
    (1990) On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, (), –. 10.1080/14640749008401236
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749008401236 [Google Scholar]
  50. Schäfer, M.
    (2018) The semantic transparency of English compound nouns. Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Schlechtweg, M.
    (2018) How stress reflects meaning. The interplay of prosodic prominence and semantic (non-)compositionality in non-lexicalized English adjective-noun combinations. InS. Arndt-Lappe, A. Braun, C. Moulin, & E. Winter-Froemel (Eds.), Expanding the Lexicon: Linguistic innovation, morphological productivity, and ludicity (pp.–). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110501933‑119
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110501933-119 [Google Scholar]
  52. (2019) Prosodic prominence variation in English adjective-noun constructions: An overview of relevant factors. InJ. Szpyra-Kozłowska & M. Radomski (Eds.), Phonetics and phonology in action (pp.–). Peter Lang Publisher.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Schmidtke, D., Van Dyke, J. A., & Kuperman, V.
    (2018) Individual variability in the semantic processing of English compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Taikh, A., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L.
    (2023) Accessing the semantic and lexical information of constituents while typing compound words. The Mental Lexicon, (), –. 10.1075/ml.21005.tai
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.21005.tai [Google Scholar]
  55. Tang, R., & Witzel, N.
    (2020) The role of phonology in processing morphologically complex words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, , –. 10.3758/s13423‑019‑01683‑w
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01683-w [Google Scholar]
  56. Tsapkini, K., Kehayia, E., & Jarema, G.
    (1999) Does phonological change play a role in the recognition of derived forms across modalities?Brain and Language, (), –. 10.1006/brln.1999.2113
     https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2113 [Google Scholar]
  57. Tse, C.-S., Yap, M. J., Chan, Y.-L., Sze, W. P., Shaoul, C., & Lin, D.
    (2017) The Chinese Lexicon Project: A megastudy of lexical decision performance for 25,000+ traditional Chinese two-character compound words. Behavior Research Methods, (), –. 10.3758/s13428‑016‑0810‑5
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0810-5 [Google Scholar]
  58. Will, U., Nottbusch, G., & Weingarten, R.
    (2006) Linguistic units in word typing: Effects of word presentation modes and typing delay. Written Language & Literacy, (), –. 10.1075/wll.9.1.10wil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.9.1.10wil [Google Scholar]
  59. Xun, Z., & Hee, Y. E.
    (2016) Comparative study on the structures of Chinese and Korean compound words. Lingua Cultura, (), –. 10.21512/lc.v10i1.884
     https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v10i1.884 [Google Scholar]
  60. Zwitserlood, P.
    (1994) The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, (), –. 10.1080/01690969408402123
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969408402123 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.24009.par
Loading
Is there a hip or a pie in hippie?
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.24009.par
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.24009.par
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.24009.par
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: semantic transparency ; morphology ; typing ; pseudo-compound words ; phonology

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