Vitevitch Michael S
Spoken Language Laboratory, Department of Psychology, 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045-7556, USA.
Clin Linguist Phon. 2003 Sep;17(6):487-99. doi: 10.1080/0269920031000107541.
Previous research suggests that sublexical and lexical representations are involved in spoken word recognition. The current experiment examined when sublexical and lexical representations are used in the processing of real words in English. The same set of words varying in phonotactic probability/neighbourhood density was presented in three different versions of a same-different matching task: (1) mostly real words as filler items, (2) an equal number of words and nonsense words as filler items and (3) mostly nonsense words as filler items. The results showed that lexical representations were used in version 1 of the same-different matching task to process the words, whereas sublexical representations were used in version 3 of the same-different matching task to process the words. Finally, in version 2 of the same-different matching task individual variation was observed in the form of distinct sublexical and lexical biases. Implications for the processing of spoken words are discussed.
先前的研究表明,次词汇和词汇表征参与了口语单词识别。当前的实验考察了次词汇和词汇表征在英语实词加工过程中何时被使用。在一个异同匹配任务的三个不同版本中呈现了同一组在音位结构概率/邻域密度上有所变化的单词:(1)主要是实词作为填充项,(2)单词和无意义词数量相等作为填充项,(3)主要是无意义词作为填充项。结果表明,在异同匹配任务的版本1中使用词汇表征来加工单词,而在异同匹配任务的版本3中使用次词汇表征来加工单词。最后,在异同匹配任务的版本2中,观察到了以不同的次词汇和词汇偏向形式存在的个体差异。文中讨论了对口语单词加工的启示。