Cover not available

Article published In: The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 16:2/3 (2021) ► pp.397–421

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Learning beyond words

Morphology and the encoding of hierarchical categories

 | University of Haifa
 | University of Haifa
 | University of Haifa
Published online: 8 March 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.20030.oma
Abstract
Learning multimorphemic words involves the simultaneous learning of two hierarchically organized categories. In such words, sub-lexical units usually encode superordinate categories, whereas whole words encode exemplars of these categories. Complex, non-linear word structure is common in Semitic languages and can be used to probe the learning of multiple form-meaning associations. The aim of this study was to investigate how well Hebrew-speaking adults learn the dual form-meaning relationships that reflect different categorical levels following a few exposures to novel Hebrew-like words. Twenty-four native Hebrew-speakers were exposed to novel words through an interactive video story. Following a few exposures to the words, the learning of the exemplars was tested in a three-alternative-forced-choice identification test. The learning of the sub-lexical morphemes and the categories they encode were tested in generalization tests. The results show that a few exposures to novel, morphologically and conceptually complex words are sufficient to allow unsupervised simultaneous learning of two hierarchical categories even though the superordinate was not explicitly represented in the input.
Article outline
  • Learning hierarchical multiple form-meaning associations
  • Nonlinear morphology and the encoding of meaning
  • The current study
  • Methods
    • Participants
    • Stimuli
  • General overview of the experimental procedure
  • Design
    • Exposure phase
    • Test phase
    • Exemplar learning test
    • Conceptual generalization test
    • Morphological generalization test
    • Data analysis
  • Results
    • Exemplar learning test
    • Conceptual generalization test
    • Morphological generalization test
  • Discussion
    • Learning form-meaning relationships at the word level
    • Learning superordinate categories encoded morphologically
  • Notes
  • References
References (59)
References
Ambridge, B. (2020a). Against stored abstractions: A radical exemplar model of language acquisition. First Language, 40 (5–6), 509–559. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020b). Abstractions made of exemplars or ‘You’re all right, and I’ve changed my mind’: Response to commentators. First Language, 40 (5–6), 640–659. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anglin, J. M. (1977). Word, object, and conceptual development.‏ Norton & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. (2007). Language: Between words and grammar. In G. Jarema & G. Libben, G. (Eds.), The mental lexicon: Core perspectives (pp. 55–79). Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bachra, B. N. (2001). The phonological structure of the verbal roots in Arabic and Hebrew (Vol. 341). Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Early referential understanding: Infants’ ability to recognize referential acts for what they are. Developmental Psychology, 29 (5), 832. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Banai, K., Nir, B., Moav-Scheff, R., & Bar-Ziv, N. (2020). A role for incidental auditory learning in auditory-visual word learning among kindergarten children. Journal of Vision, 20 (3), 4–4. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berman, R. A. (2003). Children’s lexical innovations. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 28 1, 243–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Modern Hebrew. In R. Hetzron (Ed.), The Semitic languages (pp. 312–333). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berman, R., & Seroussi, B. (2011). Derived nouns in Modern Hebrew: Structural and psycholinguistic perspectives. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 23 (1), 105–125.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (2000). How children learn the meanings of words (Vol. 3771). MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloom, P., & Markson, L. (1998). Capacities underlying word learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2 (2), 67–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, C. H., Zhang, Y., & Yu, C. (2018). Learning object names at different hierarchical levels using cross-situational statistics. Cognitive Science, 42 1, 591–605. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gelman, S. A., & O’Reilly, A. W. (1988). Children’s inductive inferences within superordinate categories: The role of language and category structure. Child Development, 59 (4), 876–887. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83 (1), 49–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Words and voices: episodic traces in spoken word identification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22 (5), 1166.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gupta, P. (2003). Examining the relationship between word learning, nonword repetition, and immediate serial recall in adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 56 (7), 1213–1236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, D. G. (1991). Acquiring proper nouns for familiar and unfamiliar animate objects: Two-year-olds’ word-learning biases. Child Development, 62 (5), 1142–1154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horton, M. S., & Markman, E. M. (1980). Developmental differences in the acquisition of basic and superordinate categories. Child Development, 708–719. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, Y. T., & Arnold, A. R. (2016). Word learning in linguistic context: Processing and Memory Effects. Cognition, 156 1, 71–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59 (4), 434–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov, Language in The Inner City (pp. 354–396). University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2005). English word-formation processes. In P. Stekauer, & R. Lieber (Eds.), Handbook of word-formation (pp. 375–427). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lupyan, G. (2012). Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: the label-feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 1. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lupyan, G., Rakison, D. H., & McClelland, J. L. (2007). Language is not just for talking: Redundant labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18 (12), 1077–1083. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markman, A. B., & Wisniewski, E. J. (1997). Similar and different: The differentiation of basic-level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23 (1), 54–70.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mather, E., & Plunkett, K. (2012). The role of novelty in early word learning. Cognitive Science, 36 (7), 1157–1177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maxfield, J. T., & Zelinsky, G. J. (2012). Searching through the hierarchy: How level of target categorization affects visual search. Visual Cognition, 20 (10), 1153–1163. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markman, E. M., & Wachtel, G. F. (1988). Children’s use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words. Cognitive Psychology, 20 (2), 121–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32 (1), 89–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Minda, J. P., Desroches, A. S., & Church, B. A. (2008). Learning rule-described and non-rule-described categories: a comparison of children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34 (6), 1518–1533.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moav-Scheff, R., Yifat, R., & Banai, K. (2015). Phonological memory and word learning deficits in children with specific language impairment: A role for perceptual context?. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 45 1, 384–399. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muchnik, M. (2017). Personal names in Modern Hebrew: A morphosyntactic and gender analysis. Folia Linguistica, 51 (2), 369–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murphy, G. (2004). The big book of concepts. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murphy, G. L., & Brownell, H. H. (1985). Category differentiation in object recognition: typicality constraints on the basic category advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11 (1), 70–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murphy, G. L., & Wisniewski, E. J. (1989). Categorizing objects in isolation and in scenes: What a superordinate is good for. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15 (4), 572–586.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nazzi, T., & Gopnik, A. (2001). Linguistic and cognitive abilities in infancy: When does language become a tool for categorization?. Cognition, 80 (3), B11–B20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115 (1), 39–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Word-level morphology: A psycholinguistic perspective on linear formation in Hebrew nominals. Morphology, 16 (1), 127–148. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8 (3), 382–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosenhouse, J. (2002). Personal names in Hebrew and Arabic: Modern trends compared to the past. Journal of Semitic Studies, 47 (1), 97–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Share, D. L. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72 (2), 95–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Share, D. L., & Shalev, C. (2004). Self-teaching in normal and disabled readers. Reading and Writing, 17 (7–8), 769–800. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shatil, N. (2006). The Hebrew noun system: A structural cognitive perspective. Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects, 68 1, 243–282.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shimron, J. (2003). Semitic languages: Are they really root-based?. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 28 1, 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sloat, C. (1969). Proper nouns in English. Language, 45 (1), 26–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (2005). Linguistic representations of motion events: What is signifier and what is signified. In C. Maeder, O. Fischer, & W. Herlofsky (Eds.), Iconicity inside out: Iconicity in language and literature (pp. 307–322). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan. I. (2006). What makes manner of motion salient. Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In M. H. S. Robert (Ed.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., & Landau, B. (1996). Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism?. Cognition, 60 (2), 143–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stošić, D. (2013). Manner of motion, evaluative and pluractional morphology. Space in South Slavic. Oslo Studies in Language, 5 (1), 61–89.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14 1, 638–647. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1991). Path to realization: a typology of event integration. Buffalo Papers in Linguistics, 91 (1), 147–187.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tamminen, J., Davis, M. H., Merkx, M., & Rastle, K. (2012). The role of memory consolidation in generalisation of new linguistic information. Cognition, 125 (1), 107–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tamminen, J., Davis, M. H., & Rastle, K. (2015). From specific examples to general knowledge in language learning. Cognitive Psychology, 79 1, 1–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Akhtar, N. (1995). Two-year-olds use pragmatic cues to differentiate reference to objects and actions. Cognitive Development, 10 (2), 201–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Waxman, S. R., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Early word-learning entails reference, not merely associations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13 (6), 258–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, F., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). Word learning as Bayesian inference. Psychological Review, 114 (2), 245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Omar, Niveen, Bracha Nir & Karen Banai
2025. Effects of Systematicity on Word Learning in Preschool Children: The Case of Semitic Morpho-Phonology. Language and Speech DOI logo
Omar, Niveen, Karen Banai & Bracha Nir
2024. When more is less: the impact of multimorphemic words on learning word meaning. Language and Cognition 16:4 ► pp. 1852 ff. DOI logo
Nathaniel, Upasana, Stav Eidelsztein, Kate Girsh Geskin, Brianna L. Yamasaki, Bracha Nir, Vedran Dronjic, James R. Booth & Tali Bitan
2023. Decomposition in early stages of learning novel morphologically derived words: The impact of linear vs. non-linear structure. Cognition 240 ► pp. 105604 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue