Badecker W, Caramazza A
Department of Psychology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218.
Brain Lang. 1987 Nov;32(2):278-305. doi: 10.1016/0093-934x(87)90129-5.
An issue that is persistently raised in studies of subjects who produce morphological errors in reading and other tasks is whether these errors are the consequence of a morphological processing deficit, or whether they in any way reflect morphological principles of organization in the lexicon. We discuss the performance of one such subject on a number of tasks and evaluate standard arguments for attributing aspects of his performance to a morphological processing deficit. Although there are several features of his performance that are suggestive in this regard; we argue that, when these issues are addressed in the context of a sufficiently elaborated theory of lexical processing, a morphological processing deficit cannot be demonstrated. We also survey a number of recent reports that purport to provide evidence for a morphological processing deficit and argue that, in most cases, they fail to support such claims for similar reasons. An important moral to be drawn from a critique of these studies is that in order to make valid inferences concerning the role of morphology in organizing the lexicon, we must consider these errors in the context of theories of the lexicon that take seriously the effects of converging lexical factors in processing.
在对那些在阅读及其他任务中出现形态错误的受试者的研究中，一个一直被提出的问题是，这些错误是形态加工缺陷的结果，还是以某种方式反映了词汇中形态组织原则。我们讨论了这样一位受试者在多项任务中的表现，并评估了将其表现的某些方面归因于形态加工缺陷的标准论据。尽管他的表现有几个特征在这方面具有启发性，但我们认为，当在一个充分详尽的词汇加工理论背景下探讨这些问题时，无法证明存在形态加工缺陷。我们还审视了近期一些声称提供了形态加工缺陷证据的报告，并认为在大多数情况下，它们因类似原因未能支持此类说法。对这些研究进行批判得出的一个重要教训是，为了就形态学在组织词汇中的作用做出有效的推断，我们必须在认真考虑加工过程中多种词汇因素影响的词汇理论背景下审视这些错误。
