Picking buttercups and eating butter cups: Spelling alternations, semantic relatedness, and their consequences for compound processing

ABSTRACT Semantic transparency (ST) is a measure quantifying the strength of meaning association between a compound word (buttercup) and its constituents (butter, cup). Borrowing ideas from computational semantics, we characterize ST in terms of the degree to which a compound and its constituents tend to share the same contexts in everyday usage, and we collect separate measures for different orthographic realizations (solid vs. open) of the same compound. We can thus compare the effects of semantic association in cases in which direct semantic access is likely to take place (buttercup), vis-á-vis forms that encourage combinatorial procedures (butter cup). ST effects are investigated in an analysis of lexical decision latencies. The results indicate that distributionally based ST variables are most predictive of response times when extracted from contexts presenting the compounds as open forms, suggesting that compound processing involves a conceptual combination procedure focusing on the merger of the constituent meanings.

[1]  Victor Kuperman,et al.  Moving spaces: Spelling alternation in English noun-noun compounds , 2013 .

[2]  Marco Marelli,et al.  Frequency Effects in the Processing of Italian Nominal Compounds: Modulation of Headedness and Semantic Transparency , 2012 .

[3]  Hsueh-Cheng Wang,et al.  Estimating Semantic Transparency of Constituents of English Compounds and Two-Character Chinese Words using Latent Semantic Analysis , 2012, CogSci.

[4]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds , 2011 .

[5]  Mirella Lapata,et al.  Composition in Distributional Models of Semantics , 2010, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  Marco Baroni,et al.  Nouns are Vectors, Adjectives are Matrices: Representing Adjective-Noun Constructions in Semantic Space , 2010, EMNLP.

[7]  Patrick Pantel,et al.  From Frequency to Meaning: Vector Space Models of Semantics , 2010, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[8]  Victor Kuperman,et al.  Using Amazon Mechanical Turk for linguistic research , 2010 .

[9]  R. Baayen,et al.  Reading polymorphemic Dutch compounds: toward a multiple route model of lexical processing. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? , 2009 .

[11]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Morphological dynamics in compound processing , 2008 .

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

[13]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing of English compound words. , 2008, British journal of psychology.

[14]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing of Finnish compound words , 2005 .

[15]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Conceptual Combination: Implications for the mental lexicon , 2007 .

[16]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  The English Lexicon Project , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[17]  Mark Steyvers,et al.  Topics in semantic representation. , 2007, Psychological review.

[18]  S. Wood Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R , 2006 .

[19]  Gary Libben,et al.  The Representation and Processing of Compound Words , 2006 .

[20]  Fintan Costello,et al.  Modeling the Interpretation and Interpretation Ease of Noun-Noun Compounds Using a Relation Space Approach to Compound Meaning , 2006 .

[21]  Joakim Nivre,et al.  MaltParser: A Data-Driven Parser-Generator for Dependency Parsing , 2006, LREC.

[22]  Keith Rayner,et al.  The role of interword spaces in the processing of English compound words , 2005 .

[23]  Pienie Zwitserlood,et al.  The impact of semantic transparency of morphologically complex words on picture naming , 2004, Brain and Language.

[24]  J. Hyönä,et al.  The length of a complex word modifies the role of morphological structure: Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds , 2003 .

[25]  Gary Libben,et al.  Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness , 2003, Brain and Language.

[26]  Diarmuid O'Donoghue,et al.  Can we model conceptual combination using distributional measures , 2001 .

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

[28]  L. Bauer When is a sequence of two nouns a compound in English? , 1998, English Language and Linguistics.

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

[30]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[31]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Influence of Thematic Relations on the Comprehension of Modifier–noun Combinations , 1997 .

[32]  Curt Burgess,et al.  Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence , 1996 .

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

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

[35]  Pamela A. Downing On the Creation and Use of English Compound Nouns. , 1977 .