third international conference on the mental lexicon, banff, alberta, canada, oct. 6-8, 2002 1...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
1
Affixal Salience and Affixal Salience and Lexical ProcessingLexical Processing
The Role of Suffix AllomorphyThe Role of Suffix Allomorphy
Juhani JärvikiviJuhani Järvikivi11, Raymond Bertram, Raymond Bertram2 2 && Jussi Jussi NiemiNiemi11
University of JoensuuUniversity of Joensuu1 1 University of TurkuUniversity of Turku22
FinlandFinland
![Page 2: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
2
The present study investigates:The role of morphological constituents in the
processing of Finnish derived words with several allomorphic stems vs. derived words with an invariant stem.
![Page 3: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
3
Evidence from Finnish derivations so far: There is not much in terms of morphological
computation (e.g., Niemi et al., 1994, Bertram et al., 2000)
Cross-linguistically, more computation for derived words found in morphologically less productive languages like English (Vannest, Bertram, Järvikivi & Niemi, 2002)
Question: Why is this? Perhaps employed Finnish affixes not salient
enough.
![Page 4: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
4
Affixal Salience (Laudanna & Burani 1995): The likelihood of an affix to occur as a processing unit in a given language
Affixal Salience is influenced by quantitative and/or distributional factors
such as:- affix length (phonological/orthographic)- affix frequency- confusability: the ratio of a phonological
string serving as a real or pseudo affix, e.g., -er in ’sister – worker’
![Page 5: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
5
Affixal Salience might also be influenced by linguistic properties such as:
Productivity Semantic coherence Phonological transparency
Perhaps the salience of Finnish affixes was compromized by one or more of the above mentioned factors
Question: Is the lack of computation as found for Finnish derivations due to the use of affixes of low salience?
![Page 6: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
6
Vannest et al. (2002) found no computation for three Finnish derivational suffixes forming adjectives from noun bases:
-isA: e.g., sotaisa ’warlike, bellicose’
of fairly low productivity, low frequency and also semantically unpredictable
-kAs: e.g., tehokas ’efficient, effective’
moderately frequent but of quite low productivity
-tOn: e.g., peloton ’fearless’
productive but only moderately frequent
![Page 7: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
7
• Thus:
Maybe computation for Finnish derivations was not observed because of low salience of the suffixes employed
• What we need are more salient suffixes
![Page 8: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
8
-Us: forms nouns from verbs (cf. English –ing)
e.g., kloonaus ’cloning’
-productive and – different from all other suffixes used so far – highly frequent
-(U)Us: the most productive means of forming nouns from adjectives in Finnish (cf. English –ness)
e.g., juoppous ’drunkenness’
- very productive and highly frequent
(in both respects more salient than any other suffix used so far)
Increasing affix salience
![Page 9: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
9
MethodMethod
Frequency manipulation (Taft 1979, Vannest et al. 2002)
- first set: Surface Frequency varied, Base Frequency kept constant
- second set: Base Frequency varied, Surface Frequency kept constant
Visual lexical decision
![Page 10: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
10
Interpretations of Base and Surface Frequency effects:
Traditionally:– Base Frequency Effect: morpheme-based access– No Base Frequency Effect: no morpheme-based
access
– Surface Frequency Effect: whole word access– No Surface Frequency Effect: no whole word
access
![Page 11: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
11
Traditional Interpretations under fire: Most notably Taft (Nijmegen, 2001) argued that
– no base frequency effect does not necessarily imply that morpheme-based access has not taken place
– Indeed it is possible, that a high-base frequency word like ’moons’ is accessed rapidly via the base ’moon’, but that in a later stage of combining stem and suffix information, processing is slowed down, because of the unusual combination of ’moon + –s’.
– For a low-base frequency word like ’cliffs’, it could be the other way around, slow access of the base, relatively quick combination of stem and suffix information.
– Taken together, this means that in effect the base frequency effect could have been wiped out.
![Page 12: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
12
In any case, however: we can claim that a) a positive Base Frequency effect means that the
base is accessedb) no base frequency effect means that the
decomposition route is not effective
Frequency manipulation is an adequate experimental tool for testing the processing of derivational morphology
Experiment with the productive and highly frequent deverbal suffix -Us
![Page 13: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
13
Results XP1: Deverbal Results XP1: Deverbal -Us-Us
640
660
680
700
720
Base Sur
RT
Hi
Lo
Reliable effect of Surface Frequency
No effect of Base Frequency (t1, p > .05, t2 < 1)
Hi Base:688 (5.2 %)
Lo Base:704 (6.8 %)
Hi Sur:650 (1.8 %)
Lo Sur:705 (6.8 %)
![Page 14: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
14
Then – although highly frequent – perhaps the deverbal –Us is not productive enough after all
Experiment 2 with the highly productive deadjectival suffix -(U)Us (cf., Eng. –ness)
![Page 15: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
15
Results XP2:Results XP2: -(U)Us-(U)Us
600
620
640
660
680
Base Sur
RT
Hi
Lo
Reliable effect of Surface
Frequency
Apparent effect of Base Frequency in the wrong direction
non-significant in item analysis (t2, p > .1)
Hi Base: 664 (2.9 %) Lo Base: 641 (1.8 %)
Hi Sur: 616 (1.8 %) Lo Sur: 641 (2.0 %)
![Page 16: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
16
Perhaps Affixal Salience can be compromised in other ways, for instance, when there is non one-to-one relation between form and meaning:
- affixal homonymy (Bertram et al., 2000) e.g., Dutch suffix -er:
- forms agentive nouns and comparatives
-er
FORM
ROWER[agent]
SLOWER [comparative]
SEMANTICS
![Page 17: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
17
Also in this study there is lack of one-to-one correspondence between form and semantics manifesting itself differently, namely the other way around
affixal allomorphy: for example, Dutch diminutive suffix (Schreuder & Baayen, 1995)
FORM SEMANTICS-pje
-tje
-etje
-je
DIMINUTIVE
![Page 18: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
18
Suffix allomorphy in Finnish: Suffix allomorphy in Finnish: ExamplesExamples
CASE -tOn (Vannest et al 2002)
-Us (XP1) -(U)Us (XP2)
Nom Sg arvoton räjähdys heikkous
Gen Sg arvottoman räjähdyksen heikkouden
Gen Pl arvottomien räjähdyksien /-ysten
heikkouksien
Ptv Sg arvotonta räjähdystä heikkoutta
Ptv Pl arvottomia räjähdyksiä heikkouksia
Ess Sg arvottomana räjähdyksenä heikkoutena
’worthless’ ’explosion’ ’weakness’
![Page 19: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
19
General Question: Is affixal salience compromized by suffix
allomorphy?
More specifically: Is the lack of computation for highly productive,
monofunctional suffixes in low surface frequency ranges, such as –Us (-Uks, -Ukse), due to suffix allomorphy?
Affixes that are productive, monofunctional and phonologically transparent
![Page 20: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
20
Highly productive suffix-hkO: forms moderative adjectives
korkeahko [HIGH + mod] ’quite high, highish’
NO allomorphy
e.g., korkeahko, korkeahkon, korkeahkoa, korkeahkoja, korkeahkona etc.
XP with frequency manipulation
![Page 21: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
21
Results XP3:Results XP3: -hkO-hkO
600
620
640
660
680
Base Sur
RTHi
Lo
A reliable Surface Frequency effect
In addition: a significant Base Frequency effect
Hi Base: 635 (4.5 %)
Lo Base: 667 (6.9 %) Hi Sur: 619 (3.4 %)
Lo Sur: 643 (6.1 %)
![Page 22: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
22
However,-hkO: corpus-based index of productivity even higher than for –(U)Us
Possibility that the results were due to extreme productivity of –hkO alone
Experiment with another invariant suffix: -stO: collective nouns kirjasto [BOOK + coll] ’library’
kirjasto, kirjaston, kirjastoa, kirjastoja, etc.- only moderately productive and of comparatively low frequency
![Page 23: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
23
Results XP4:Results XP4: -stO-stO
650
670
690
710
730
750
Base Sur
RTHi
Lo
A reliable Surface Frequency effect
Again: a significant Base Frequency effect
Hi Base:687 (3.2 %)
Lo Base:738 (6.6 %)
Hi Sur: 677 (4.4 %)
Lo Sur: 709 (9.4 %)
![Page 24: Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002 1 Affixal Salience and Lexical Processing The Role of Suffix](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062515/56649d135503460f949e6e08/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Third International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2002
24
In conclusionIn conclusion
Affixal Salience is compromized by suffix allomorphy
In case of many allomorphemic variants (as with both –Us suffixes) affixal salience is decreased and the decomposition process is troubled.
In case of formal invariance (as with the phonologically transparent suffixes –stO and –hkO), suffixes are salient enough to allow effective decomposition