When morphological structure overrides meaning: evidence from German prefix and particle verbs

ABSTRACT A key question in the study of lexical processing has been whether the semantic transparency of multimorphemic words affects processing. Previous studies of English and French prefixed words have found that words with greater semantic transparency show greater morphological constituent activation. Studies of German, however, have shown constituent activation that is unaffected by semantic transparency. We report two cross-modal priming experiments that examined the underlying causes of this between-language difference. Experiment 1 investigated German particle verbs, in which the particle can be separated from the verb stem. Experiment 2 investigated prefix verbs, which (as in English and French) cannot be separated from the verb stem. Results showed that semantically transparent and opaque prefix and particle verbs induced equivalent priming relative to form controls. This indicates structured representations for all categories. We discuss these findings in relation to a language user’s experience with the particular properties of word types.

[1]  G. Libben,et al.  ‘Can you wash off the hogwash?’ – semantic transparency of first and second constituents in the processing of German compounds , 2017 .

[2]  石黒 真木夫,et al.  Akaike information criterion statistics , 1986 .

[3]  Anke Lüdeling,et al.  German particle verbs and word formation , 2002 .

[4]  Marcus Taft,et al.  The effects of semantic transparency and base frequency on the recognition of English complex words. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[5]  J. Grainger,et al.  Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition , 2005 .

[6]  R. H. Baayen,et al.  The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM) , 1996 .

[7]  L. Feldman,et al.  Morphological facilitation following prefixed but not suffixed primes: lexical architecture or modality-specific processes? , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Carsten Eulitz,et al.  'Verstehen ' ('understand') primes ' stehen ' ('stand'): Morphological structure overrides semantic compositionality in the lexical representation of German complex verbs , 2014 .

[9]  G. Jarema,et al.  Interaction of Morphological Structure and Prefix Transparency in the Processing of Bulgarian Aspectual Verb Forms , 2002, Brain and Language.

[10]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  R. Baayen,et al.  Analyzing Reaction Times , 2010 .

[12]  Nivja H. de Jong,et al.  The morphological family size effect and morphology , 2000 .

[13]  C. Pliatsikas,et al.  Morphological processing in the brain: the good (inflection), the bad (derivation) and the ugly (compounding) , 2019, Cortex.

[14]  Kenneth R. Pugh,et al.  How Children Learn to Read : Current Issues and New Directions in the Integration of Cognition, Neurobiology and Genetics of Reading and Dyslexia Research and Practice , 2011 .

[15]  Bodo Winter,et al.  Linear models and linear mixed effects models in R with linguistic applications , 2013, ArXiv.

[16]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[17]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[18]  C. Pollard,et al.  Center for the Study of Language and Information , 2022 .

[19]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer , 2002 .

[20]  Gadi Goelman,et al.  Hebrew Brain vs. English Brain: Language Modulates the Way It Is Processed , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[21]  Petar Milin,et al.  Models of Lexical Access and Morphological Processing , 2017 .

[22]  Marcus Taft,et al.  A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon , 2010 .

[23]  Susan Olsen,et al.  Partikelverben im deutsch-englischen Vergleich , 1996 .

[24]  Robert Schreuder,et al.  Effects of Family Size for Complex Words , 2000 .

[25]  H. Behrens,et al.  How difficult are complex verbs? Evidence from German, Dutch and English , 1998 .

[26]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Compounding as Abstract Operation in Semantic Space: Investigating relational effects through a large-scale, data-driven computational model , 2017, Cognition.

[27]  Anke Lüdeling,et al.  On Particle Verbs and Similar Constructions in German , 2001 .

[28]  Kevin Diependaele,et al.  Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words , 2009, Memory & cognition.

[29]  K. Forster,et al.  Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words , 1975 .

[30]  Eve V. Clark,et al.  Acquisition of Derivational Morphology , 2014 .

[31]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Allomorphic variation in Arabic: Implications for lexical processing and representation , 2004, Brain and Language.

[32]  Gary Libben,et al.  The nature of compounds: A psychocentric perspective , 2014, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[33]  Wolfgang Fleischer,et al.  Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache , 2012 .

[34]  J. Rueckl,et al.  The locus and time course of long-term morphological priming , 2005 .

[35]  Carsten Eulitz,et al.  Psycholinguistic measures for German verb pairs: Semantic transparency, semantic relatedness, verb family size, and age of reading acquisition , 2018, Behavior Research Methods.

[36]  Marco Marelli,et al.  ‘Understanding’ differs between English and German: Capturing systematic language differences of complex words , 2019, Cortex.

[37]  P. Zwitserlood,et al.  Priming morphologically complex verbs by sentence contexts: Effects of semantic transparency and ambiguity , 2005 .

[38]  Frank Rösler,et al.  When semantics means less than morphology: The processing of German prefixed verbs , 2009 .

[39]  A. Cutler,et al.  Exploring the Role of Lexical stress in Lexical Recognition , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[40]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Early decomposition in visual word recognition: Dissociating morphology, form, and meaning , 2008, Language and cognitive processes.

[41]  Anne Cutler.  Productivity in word formation , 1980 .

[42]  G. Libben,et al.  The Mental Lexicon: Core Perspectives , 2007 .

[43]  Dagmar Bittner,et al.  Development of verb inflection in first language acquisition : a cross-linguistic perspective , 2003 .

[44]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study , 2000 .

[45]  J. Segui,et al.  Morphological priming without morphological relationship , 2003 .

[46]  L. Feldman,et al.  Morphological Priming: The Role of Prime Duration, Semantic Transparency, and Affix Position , 1999, Brain and Language.

[47]  Mark Aronoff,et al.  Word Formation in Generative Grammar , 1979 .

[48]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. , 1994 .

[49]  Frank Rösler,et al.  Take a stand on understanding: electrophysiological evidence for stem access in German complex verbs , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[50]  Dudenredaktion.  Die deutsche Rechtschreibung , 1996 .

[51]  Ram Frost,et al.  Towards a universal model of reading , 2012, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[52]  Laurie Beth Feldman,et al.  Semantic aspects of morphological processing: Transparency effects in Serbian , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[53]  Marco Marelli,et al.  Semantic Transparency in Free Stems: The Effect of Orthography-Semantics Consistency on Word Recognition , 2015, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[54]  R. Holloway.  The broth in my brother ’ s brothel : Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition , 2005 .

[55]  S. Soto-Faraco,et al.  Journal of Memory and Language , 2001 .