Cross-Morphemic Predictability and the Lexical Access of Compounds in Mandarin Chinese

Chinese poses a challenge for models of compound processing, since the basic notions of morpheme, word and phrase are not consistently distinguished by native speakers. It is thus proposed that the mental lexicon consists of linked and overlapping listemes (in the sense of Di Sciullo and Williams 1987) which can potentially be of any size (morpheme, word, phrase). One implication of this approach for compound processing is that cross-morphemic predictability should play an important role: the more predictable one morpheme is from the other, the easier the compound should be to access. To study this implication, cross-morphemic predictability is quantified using the measure of Mutual Information from information theory, which divides the frequency of the constituent of interest (i.e. a compound) by the frequencies of the components (i.e. morphemes). This leads to two specific predictions: compound frequency should have a positive effect on lexical access, but morpheme frequency should have a negative effect. In Experiment 1, it is demonstrated that a very simple connectionist network, built according to the overlapping listeme approach, conforms to these two predictions. This suggests that separate effects of word and morpheme frequency need not require separate processing levels for words and morphemes. Experiment 2 then compares the network's behavior with Chinese native speakers in a lexical decision task involving spoken Mandarin Chinese compounds. As predicted, there was a positive effect of word frequency on response speed and accuracy, and a negative effect of morpheme frequency. Suggestions are made for reconciling these results with the more familiar positive or neutral morpheme frequency effects found in other studies.

[1]  Gerry Altmann,et al.  Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives - Workshop Overview , 1989, AI Mag..

[2]  A. Zwicky,et al.  The handbook of morphology , 2001 .

[3]  Robert Schreuder,et al.  How Complex Simplex Words can be , 1997 .

[4]  Stephen R. Anderson,et al.  A-Morphous morphology , 1992 .

[5]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Exercises in Rethinking Innateness: A Handbook for Connectionist Simulations , 1997 .

[6]  Gary Libben,et al.  Semantic Transparency in the Processing of Compounds: Consequences for Representation, Processing, and Impairment , 1998, Brain and Language.

[7]  Richard Shillcock,et al.  Lexical hypotheses in continuous speech , 1991 .

[8]  Jian Wang,et al.  Reading Chinese Script : A Cognitive Analysis , 1999 .

[9]  F ROSENBLATT,et al.  The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. , 1958, Psychological review.

[10]  Jian Wang,et al.  How Is Access Representation Organized? The Relation of Polymorphemic Words and Their Morphemes in Chinese , 1999 .

[11]  San Duanmu,et al.  Wordhood in Chinese , 1998 .

[12]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning internal representations by error propagation , 1986 .

[13]  陳 烜之,et al.  Cognitive processing of Chinese and related Asian Languages , 1997 .

[14]  Joan L. Bybee Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form , 1985 .

[15]  Gary Libben,et al.  Ambiguous Novel Compounds and Models of Morphological Parsing , 1999, Brain and Language.

[16]  Chu-Ren Huang,et al.  A Data-driven Approach to the Mental Lexicon: Two Studies on Chinese Corpus Linguistics , 1998 .

[17]  Marcus Taft,et al.  The representation of bound morphemes in the lexicon: A Chinese study. , 1995 .

[18]  Chu-Ren Huang,et al.  SINICA CORPUS : Design Methodology for Balanced Corpora , 1996, PACLIC.

[19]  S. Andrews Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects? , 1986 .

[20]  Kenneth Ward Church,et al.  Word Association Norms, Mutual Information, and Lexicography , 1989, ACL.

[21]  Marcus Taft,et al.  Judging homophony in Chinese : the influence of tones , 1992 .

[22]  A. Ralli,et al.  The Role of Morphological Structure in the Processing of Compounds: The Interface between Linguistics and Psycholinguistics , 1999, Brain and Language.

[23]  B. Butterworth Development, writing, and other language processes , 1983 .

[24]  Rumjahn Hoosain,et al.  Psychological Reality of the Word in Chinese , 1992 .

[25]  Jerome L. Packard,et al.  Lexical Access in Chinese Speech Comprehension and Production , 1999, Brain and Language.

[26]  Ovid J. L. Tzeng,et al.  Language processing in Chinese , 1992 .

[27]  Koenraad Kuiper,et al.  On defining the Chinese compound word: Headedness in Chinese compounding and Chinese VR compounds , 1998 .

[28]  Gary Libben,et al.  Processing Compounds: A Cross-Linguistic Study , 1999, Brain and Language.

[29]  John Defrancis Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems , 1991 .

[30]  H. J. Jaarsveld,et al.  Frequency effects in the processing of lexicalized and novel nominal compounds , 1988 .

[31]  A. Inhoff,et al.  Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[32]  Laurie Beth Feldman,et al.  Morphological aspects of language processing. , 1997 .

[33]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Words, Morphemes, and Syllables in the Chinese Mental Lexicon. , 1994 .

[34]  K. Forster,et al.  Lexical Access and Naming Time. , 1973 .

[35]  K. Forster,et al.  Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. , 1976 .

[36]  J. Rueckl,et al.  The Influence of Morphological Regularities on the Dynamics of a Connectionist Network , 1999, Brain and Language.

[37]  Cynthia M. Connine,et al.  Processing Spoken Chinese: The Role of Tone Information , 1999 .

[38]  James Myers,et al.  Tone Sandhi as Evidence for Segmenta- tion in Taiwanese , 1999 .

[39]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Morphological Structure in the Chinese Mental Lexicon , 1995 .

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

[41]  J. Jenkins,et al.  Word association norms , 1964 .

[42]  Pienie Zwitserlood,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds , 1994 .

[43]  Dominiek Sandra,et al.  On the Representation and Processing of Compound Words: Automatic Access to Constituent Morphemes Does Not Occur , 1990 .