Cover not available

Article published In: The Mental Lexicon: Online-First Articles

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

Morphological processing in written word recognition

New evidence on visual priming with stem-homographs and stem-allomorphs in Italian

 | University of Salerno
ORCiD logo with link | University of Salerno
 | University of Salerno
Published online: 5 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.24012.bra
Abstract
Morphological effects are consistently reported in written word recognition but their theoretical explanation is still debated. The paper aims to disentangle the specific role of morphological information from orthography during written word recognition. We exploit the “morphemic ambiguity” of stem-homographs, words that share formally identical but morphologically and semantically unrelated stems (e.g., mor-a, “blackberry” and mor-ire, “to die”). Two unmasked visual priming lexical decision experiments are described. The results replicate the inhibitory priming effects elicited by stem-homographs, extend it to their allomorphic variants in Italian (e.g., mor-a, and muor-e, “he/she dies”, verb form deriving from an allomorph (muor-) of the homographic stem mor- of morire) and differentiate the stem-homographs and the stem-allomorphs inhibition from the positional effects of orthographic overlap in prime-target pairs. The pattern of data confirms the presence of mechanisms of morphological segmentation in word recognition. On the other hand, the effects fit with hypotheses of graded morphology where word stems are supposed to affect the processing of words on the basis of multiple connections between regular and irregular forms included in their inflectional paradigms and derivational families.
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • The stem-homographs effect: Data and controversies
    • Aims of the study
  • Experiment 1
    • 1.1Materials & methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Experimental session
      • Procedure
    • 1.2Results
    • 1.3Interim discussion
  • Experiment 2
    • 2.1Materials & methods
      • Participants
      • Materials
      • Experimental session
      • Procedure
    • 2.2Results and discussion
  • General discussion
  • Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (67)
References
Allen, M., & Badecker, W. (1999). Stem homograph inhibition and stem allomorphy: Representing and processing inflected forms in a multilevel lexical system. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(1), 105–123. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Inflectional regularity: Probing the nature of lexical representation in a cross-modal priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(4), 705–722. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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, 24461. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H. (2007). Storage and computation in the mental lexicon. In The mental lexicon (pp. 81–104). Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Đurđević, D. F., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 118 (3), 438–481. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Feldman, L. B., & Schreuder, R. (2006). Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(2), 290–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Badecker, W., & Allen, M. (2002). Morphological parsing and the perception of lexical identity: A masked priming study of stem homographs. Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), 125–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barber, H., Domınguez, A., & de Vega, M. (2002). Human brain potentials indicate morphological decomposition in visual word recognition. Neuroscience Letters, 318(3), 149–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2013). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-2.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M., Burani, C., Laudanna, A., Marconi, L., Ratti, D., Rolando, C., & Thornton, A. M. (2005). Colfis (corpus e lessico di frequenza dell’italiano scritto). Available on [URL], 67–73.
Beyersmann, E., & Grainger, J. (2023). The role of embedded words and morphemes in reading. In Linguistic morphology in the mind and brain (pp. 26–49). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beyersmann, E., Grainger, J., & Castles, A. (2019). Embedded stems as a bootstrapping mechanism for morphological parsing during reading development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1821, 196–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bracco, G., Laudanna, A. (2012). L’informazione fonologica nell’elaborazione lessicale delle parole scritte. In Lessico e Lessicologia (pp. 343–354). Bulzoni.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Caramazza, A., Laudanna, A., & Romani, C. (1988). Lexical access and inflectional morphology. Cognition, 28(3), 297–332. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carreiras, M., Perdomo, A., & Meseguer, E. (2005). Are stem homographs and orthographic neighbours processed differently during silent reading? Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 317–339. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crepaldi, D., Amenta, S., & Marelli, M. (2019). For a probabilistic and multidisciplinary approach to the investigation of morphological processing. Cortex, 1161, 1–3. 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
de Almeida, R. G., Gallant, J., Antal, C., & Libben, G. (2024). Semantic access to ambiguous word roots cannot be stopped by affixation — Not even in sentence contexts: Evidence from eye-tracking and the maze task Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Martino, M., Mancuso, A., Russo, A. G., Elia, A., Di Salle, F., Saponiero, R., ... & Laudanna, A. (2020). Producing regularly and irregularly inflected verb forms: behavioural and neuroimaging data from the three Italian conjugations. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(4), 420–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2009). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: The case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition, 37(6), 895–908. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Grainger, J., & Sandra, D. (2012). Derivational morphology and skilled reading. In The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 311–332). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Domínguez, A., De Vega, M., & Barber, H. (2004). Event-related brain potentials elicited by morphological, homographic, orthographic, and semantic priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(4), 598–608. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drews, E., & Zwitserlood, P. (1995). Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(5), 1098–1116.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, 161, 684–691. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer-Baum, S., Charny, J., McCloskey, M. (2011). Both-edges representation of letter position in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 181, 1083–1089. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fowler, C. A., Napps, S. E., & Feldman, L. (1985). Relations among regular and irregular morphologically related words in the lexicon as revealed by repetition priming. Memory & Cognition, 131, 241–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., Gilboa, O., Tannenbaum, M., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (2000). Morphological priming: Dissociation of phonological, semantic, and morphological factors. Memory & Cognition, 28(8), 1277–1288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(4), 829.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García-Albea, J. E., Sanchez-Casas, R. M., & Igoa, J. M. (1998). The contribution of word form and meaning to language processing in Spanish: Some evidence from monolingual and bilingual studies. In Sentence processing: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 183–209). Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giraudo, H., & Grainger, J. (2001). Priming complex words: Evidence for supralexical representation of morphology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 81, 127–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gonnerman, L. M., Seidenberg, M. S., & Andersen, E. S. (2007). Graded semantic and phonological similarity effects in priming: evidence for a distributed connectionist approach to morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grainger, J. (2018). Orthographic processing: A ‘mid-level’vision of reading: The 44th Sir Frederic Bartlett Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(2), 335–359. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grainger, J., & Beyersmann, E. (2017). Edge-aligned embedded word activation initiates morpho-orthographic segmentation. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 671, pp. 285–317). Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grainger, J., & Ziegler, J. C. (2011). A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 21, 54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2016). A vision of reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(3), 171–179. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hay, J. B., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 342–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Järvikivi, J., Pyykkönen, P., & Niemi, J. (2009). Exploiting degrees of inflectional ambiguity: Stem form and the time course of morphological processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(1), 221–237.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laudanna, A., & Burani, C. (1986). Effetti di ripetizione e priming su forme verbali morfologicamente collegate. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 131, 123–139.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laudanna, A., Badecker, W., & Caramazza, A. (1989). Priming homographic stems. Journal of Memory and language, 28(5), 531–546. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Processing inflectional and derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(3), 333–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laudanna, A., Voghera, M., & Gazzellini, S. (2002). Lexical representations of written nouns and verbs in Italian. Brain and Language, 81(1–3), 250–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leminen, A., Smolka, E., Dunabeitia, J. A., & Pliatsikas, C. (2019). Morphological processing in the brain: The good (inflection), the bad (derivation) and the ugly (compounding). Cortex, 1161, 4–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P., & Herve, M. (2018). Package “Emmeans”. R Package Version 4.0–3.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. (1999). Language production: A blueprint of the speaker. In Neurocognition of Language (pp. 83–122). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 221, 1–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Libben, G., & De Almeida, R. G. (2003, January). Is there a morphological parser? In Morphology 2000: Selected papers from the 9th Morphology Meeting, Vienna, 24–28 February 2000 (pp. 213–225). John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marelli, M., & Baroni, M. (2015). Affixation in semantic space: Modeling morpheme meanings with compositional distributional semantics. Psychological Review, 122(3), 485–515. 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
Milin, P., Smolka, E., & Feldman, L. B. (2017). Models of lexical access and morphological processing. In The handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 240–268). Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plaut, D. C., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to lexical processing? Language and Cognitive Processes, 15 (4–5), 445–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., & New, B. (2004). The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 111, 1090–1098. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rueckl, J. G., & Raveh, M. (1999). The influence of morphological regularities on the dynamics of a connectionist network. Brain and Language, 68(1–2), 110–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Russo, A. G., Esposito, F., Laudanna, A., Mancuso, A., Di Salle, F., Elia, A., & De Martino, M. (2021). The neural substrate of noun morphological inflection: A rapid event-related fMRI study in Italian. Neuropsychologia, 1511, 107699. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevens, P., & Plaut, D. C. (2022). From decomposition to distributed theories of morphological processing in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(5), 1673–1702. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stolz, J. A., & Feldman, L. B. (1995). The role of orthographic and semantic transparency of the base morpheme in morphological processing. In Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 109–129). L.B. (Ed.). (1995). Morphological Aspects of Language Processing (1st ed.). Psychology Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M. (1979). Lexical access-via an orthographic code: The basic orthographic syllabic structure (BOSS). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(1), 21–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Processing of orthographic structure by adults of different reading ability. Language and Speech, 44(3), 351–376. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(4), 745–765. 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(6), 638–647. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Nguyen-Hoan, M. (2010). A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(2), 277–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsang, Y. K., & Chen, H. C. (2010). Morphemic ambiguity resolution in Chinese: Activation of the subordinate meaning with a prior dominant-biased context. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(6), 875–881. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Early morphological processing is sensitive to morphemic meanings: Evidence from processing ambiguous morphemes. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 223–239. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsang, Y. K., Wong, A. W. K., Huang, J., & Chen, H. C. (2014). Morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic processing in word recognition and production: Evidence from ambiguous morphemes. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(5), 543–560. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Y., Duan, R., Zhao, S., & Tsang, Y. K. (2020). Processing ambiguous morphemes in Chinese compound word recognition: Behavioral and ERP evidence. Neuroscience, 4461, 249 — 260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Y., Tsang, Y. K., Wong, A. W. K., & Chen, H. C. (2017). The processing of homographic morphemes in Chinese: An ERP study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32(1), 102 — 116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, J., & Taft, M. (2015). The effects of semantic transparency and base frequency on the recognition of English complex words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(3), 904–910.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhao, S., Wu, Y., Tsang, Y. K., Sui, X., & Zhu, Z. (2021). Morpho-semantic analysis of ambiguous morphemes in Chinese compound word recognition: An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 1571, Article 107862. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue