Cover not available

Article published In: The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 17:2 (2022) ► pp.277–299

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

Is meaning construction attempted during the processing of pseudo-compounds?

 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
 | University of Alberta
Published online: 25 October 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.21010.cru
Abstract
Psycholinguists have yet to reach a consensus on what role constituent morphemes play in the processing of compound words, although some recent work suggests that morphemes are activated obligatorily during processing. In the current study, we investigate whether people use morphemes to attempt meaning construction even for pseudo-compounds which are words that appear to have a compound structure, but in fact do not (e.g., carpet is not car + pet). We obtained relational entropies (a measure of potential relational competition) for a set of pseudo-compound words based on responses from a possible relations task. The relational entropy values as well as frequency of the prime (e.g., carpet) and target (e.g., car) were then used to predict the processing of the pseudo-first constituents after exposure to the pseudo-compound masked primes. We observed a significant three-way interaction between entropy, target frequency, and prime frequency. Our results suggest that meaning construction is attempted for pseudo-compound words.
Article outline
  • Is meaning construction attempted during the processing of pseudo-compounds?
    • Current investigation
  • Experiment: Possible relations task
  • Methods
    • Materials
    • Participants
    • Procedure
  • Results
  • Using relational entropy to predict lexical decision time
    • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (64)
References
Amenta, S., & Crepaldi, D. (2012). Morphological processing as we know it: An analytical review of morphological effects in visual word identification. Frontiers in Psychology, 31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andrews, S. (1986). Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 251, 726–740. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model. Journal of Memory & Language, 37(1), 94–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(2), 283–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burani, C., & Caramazza, A. (1987). Representation and processing of derived words. Language & Cognitive Processes, 2(3–4), 217–227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burani, C., Salmaso, D., & Caramazza, A. (1984). Morphological structure and lexical access. Visible Language, 181, 342–352.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. Language production, 21, 257–294.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. M., Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., & Lõo, K. (2020). Detecting spelling errors in compound and pseudo compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(3), 580–602. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Colé, P., Beauvillain, C., & Segui, J. (1989). On the representation and processing of prefixed and suffixed derived words: A differential frequency effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(1), 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (1991). Elements of Information Theory. Wiley Series in Telecommunications. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crepaldi, D., Rastle, K., Coltheart, M., & Nickels, L. (2010). “Fell” primes “fall”, but does “bell” prime “ball”? Masked priming with irregularly-inflected primes. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 83–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2005). Masked cross-modal morphological priming: Unravelling morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic influences in early word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 75–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Gvozdenović, V., O’Connor, P. A., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (2012). Semantic similarity influences early morphological priming in Serbian: A challenge to form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 668–676. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & del Prado Martín, F. M. (2009). Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: A violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 684–691. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fiorentino, R., & Poeppel, D. (2007). Compound words and structure in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 221, 953–1000. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frisson, S., Niswander-Klement, E., & Pollatsek, A. (2008). The role of semantic transparency in the processing of English compound words. British Journal of Psychology, 99(1), 87–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L., & Shoben, E. J. (1997). Influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 231, 71–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2007). Conceptual Combination: Implications for the mental lexicon. In G. Libben & G. Jarema (Eds.), The Representation and Processing of Compound Words (pp. 145–168). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory and Language, 60(1), 20–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C., & Spalding, T. L. (2014a). Conceptual composition: The role of relational competition in the comprehension of modifier-noun phrases and noun–noun compounds. In B. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, (pp. 97–130). Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L. & Spalding, T. L. (2014b). Relational diversity and ease of processing for opaque and transparent English compounds. In Rainer, F., Gardani, F., Luschutzky, H. C. & Dressler, W. U. (eds.), Morphology and meaning, 153–162. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, PI: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gagné, C. L., Spalding, T. L., Nisbet, K. A., & Armstrong, C. (2018). Pseudo-morphemic structure inhibits, but morphemic structure facilitates, processing of a repeated free morpheme. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 33(10), 1252–1274. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1131, 256–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2000). Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 151, 421–444. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 81, 127–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Günther, F., & Marelli, M. (2019). Enter sand-man: Compound processing and semantic transparency in a compositional perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 451, 1872–1882.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Trying to make it work: Compositional effects in the processing of compound “nonwords”. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(7), 1082–1091. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hay, J. (2001). Lexical frequency in morphology: is everything relative? Linguistics, 39(6). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Inhoff, A. W., Radach, R., & Heller, D. (2000). Complex compounds in German: Interword spaces facilitate segmentation but hinder assignment meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 421, 23–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ji, H., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2011). Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 651, 406–430. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koester, D., Gunter, T. C., & Wagner, S. (2007). The morphosyntactic decomposition and semantic composition of German compound words investigated by ERPs. Brain and Language, 1021, 64–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehtonen, M., Cunillera, T., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., Hultén, A., Tuomainen, J., & Laine, M. (2007). Recognition of morphologically complex words in Finnish: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1148(1), 123–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levi, J. N. (1978). The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. New York: Academic Press, 55(2), 396–407.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Libben, G. (1998). Semantic transparency in the processing of compounds: Consequences for representation, processing, and impairment. Brain and Language, 61(1), 30–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Compounds words, semantic transparency, and morphological transcendence. New Impulses in Word-Formation, 171, 317–329.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Libben, G., Gibson, M., Yoon, Y. B., & Sandra, D. (2003). Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, 84(1), 50–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Longtin, C. M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(3), 313–334. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Manelis, L., & Tharp, D. A. (1977). The processing of affixed words. Memory & Cognition, 5(6), 690–695. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marelli, M., Amenta, S., Morone, E. A., & Crepaldi, D. (2013). Meaning is in the beholder’s eye: Morpho-semantic effects in masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3), 534–541. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101(1), 3–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scarborough, D. L., Cortese, C., & Scarborough, H. S. (1977). Frequency and repetition effects in lexical memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 31, 1–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidtke, D., Gagné, C. L., Kuperman, V., Spalding, T. L., & Tucker, B. V. (2018a). Conceptual relations compete during auditory and visual compound word recognition. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(7), 923–942. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidtke, D., Gagné, C. L., Kuperman, V., Spalding, T. L. (2018b). Language experience shapes relational knowledge of compound words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 251, 1468–1487. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidtke, D., Kuperman, V., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2016). Competition between conceptual relations affects compound recognition: The role of entropy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(2), 556–570. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (1995). Modelling morphological processing. In L. B. Feldman (ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 131–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1997). How complex simple words can be. Journal of Memory and Language, 371, 118–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell Technical Journal, 27(4), 379–423. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spalding, T. L., & Gagné, C. L. (2008). CARIN theory reanalysis reanalyzed: A comment on Maguire, Devereux, Costello, and Cater 2007. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 341, 1573–1578. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spalding, T. L., & Gagné, C. L. (2011). Relation priming in established compounds: Facilitation? Memory & Cognition, 391, 1472–1486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spalding, T. L., Gagné, C. L., Mullaly, A. C., & Ji, H. (2010). Relation-based interpretation of noun-noun phrases: A new theoretical approach. New impulses in word-formation, 171, 283–315.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spalding, T. L., Stedman, J., Hancock, C., & Gagné, C. L. (2014). Intentionality and the Aristotelian-Thomistic view of concepts. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 35(4), 245–261. [URL]
Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18(1), 21–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1994). Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 91, 271–294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Morphological representation as a correlation between form and meaning. In E. M. H. Assink, D. Sandra (Eds.), Reading complex words. Neuropsychology and cognition, vol 22 (pp. 113–137). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 571, 745–765. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Ardasinski, S. (2006). Obligatory decomposition in reading prefixed words. Mental Lexicon, 11, 183–199. 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, 141, 638–647. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1976). Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(6), 607–620. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Kougious, P. (2004). The processing of morpheme-like units in monomorphemic words. Brain and Language, 901, 9–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwitserlood, P. (1994). The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, 91, 341–368. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwiterslood, P., Bolwiender, A., & Drews, E. (2005). Priming morphologically complex vergs by sentence contexts: Effects of semantic transparency and ambiguity. Language and Cognitive Processes, 201, 395–415. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Gagné, Christina L., Leah Auch & Thomas L. Spalding
2025. Consequences of morpheme access during the comprehension and production of three types of pseudo-compounds. Morphology 35:4 ► pp. 587 ff. DOI logo
Gagné, Christina L. & Thomas L. Spalding
2025. 78795 Noun-noun compounds. In Word-Formation - Semantics and Pragmatics, ► pp. 79 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