词汇表征是分级的还是离散的?

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-31 DOI:10.1177/17470218231187027
Leon Li, Andrés Buxó-Lugo, Cassandra L Jacobs, L Robert Slevc
{"title":"词汇表征是分级的还是离散的?","authors":"Leon Li, Andrés Buxó-Lugo, Cassandra L Jacobs, L Robert Slevc","doi":"10.1177/17470218231187027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most research on mental lexical representations (lemmas) assumes they are discrete and correspond in number to a word's number of distinct meanings. Thus, homophones (<i>bat</i>), whose meanings are unrelated, have separate lemmas for each meaning (one for <i>baseball bat</i>, another for <i>flying bat</i>), whereas polysemes (<i>paper</i>), whose senses are related, have shared lemmas (the same lemma for <i>printer paper</i> and <i>term paper</i>). However, most aspects of cognition are thought to be graded, not discrete; could lemmas be graded too? We conducted a preregistered picture-word interference study with pictures of words whose meanings ranged from unrelated (homophones) to very related (regular polysemes). Whereas semantic competitors to picture names slow picture naming, semantic competitors to non-depicted meanings of homophones <i>facilitate</i> naming, suggesting distinct lemmas for homophones' meanings. We predicted that competitors to non-depicted senses of polysemes would slow naming, as polysemes' depicted and non-depicted senses presumably share a lemma. Crucially, we aimed to examine the transition from facilitation to inhibition: two groupings (where competitors to non-depicted senses led to facilitation for words with two lemmas but inhibition for words with one lemma) would imply that lemmas are indeed discrete. But a transition that varies continuously by sense relatedness would imply that lemmas are graded. Unexpectedly, competitors to non-depicted senses of both homophones and polysemes facilitated naming. Although these results do not indicate whether lemmas are graded or discrete, they do inform a long-standing question on the nature of polysemes, supporting a multiple-lemma (vs. core-lemma) account.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"909-923"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are lexical representations graded or discrete?\",\"authors\":\"Leon Li, Andrés Buxó-Lugo, Cassandra L Jacobs, L Robert Slevc\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218231187027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Most research on mental lexical representations (lemmas) assumes they are discrete and correspond in number to a word's number of distinct meanings. Thus, homophones (<i>bat</i>), whose meanings are unrelated, have separate lemmas for each meaning (one for <i>baseball bat</i>, another for <i>flying bat</i>), whereas polysemes (<i>paper</i>), whose senses are related, have shared lemmas (the same lemma for <i>printer paper</i> and <i>term paper</i>). However, most aspects of cognition are thought to be graded, not discrete; could lemmas be graded too? We conducted a preregistered picture-word interference study with pictures of words whose meanings ranged from unrelated (homophones) to very related (regular polysemes). Whereas semantic competitors to picture names slow picture naming, semantic competitors to non-depicted meanings of homophones <i>facilitate</i> naming, suggesting distinct lemmas for homophones' meanings. We predicted that competitors to non-depicted senses of polysemes would slow naming, as polysemes' depicted and non-depicted senses presumably share a lemma. Crucially, we aimed to examine the transition from facilitation to inhibition: two groupings (where competitors to non-depicted senses led to facilitation for words with two lemmas but inhibition for words with one lemma) would imply that lemmas are indeed discrete. But a transition that varies continuously by sense relatedness would imply that lemmas are graded. Unexpectedly, competitors to non-depicted senses of both homophones and polysemes facilitated naming. Although these results do not indicate whether lemmas are graded or discrete, they do inform a long-standing question on the nature of polysemes, supporting a multiple-lemma (vs. core-lemma) account.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"909-923\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231187027\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231187027","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于心理词汇表征(词素)的大多数研究都假定它们是离散的,其数量与一个词的不同意义数量相对应。因此,词义互不相关的同音词(蝙蝠)在每个词义上都有单独的词表(棒球棒有一个词表,飞行蝙蝠有另一个词表),而词义相关的多义词(纸张)则有共同的词表(打印机纸张和术语纸张有相同的词表)。然而,人们认为认知的大多数方面都是分级的,而不是离散的;那么词素是否也可以分级呢?我们进行了一项预先登记的图片-词语干扰研究,研究对象是词义从不相干(同音词)到非常相关(规则多义词)的词语图片。图片名称的语义竞争者会减慢图片命名的速度,而同音词的非描述性含义的语义竞争者则会促进命名,这表明同音词的含义有不同的词素。我们预测,多义词的非描绘义竞争者会减慢命名速度,因为多义词的描绘义和非描绘义可能共享一个词素。最重要的是,我们的目标是研究从促进到抑制的过渡:两种分组(对非描绘义的竞争者会导致有两个词素的词的促进,而对有一个词素的词的抑制)意味着词素确实是离散的。但是,根据词义相关性不断变化的过渡则意味着词性是分级的。意想不到的是,同音词和多义词的非描绘义竞争者都有助于命名。尽管这些结果并不能说明词素是分级的还是离散的,但它们确实为一个关于多词素性质的长期问题提供了信息,支持了多词素(相对于核心词素)的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Are lexical representations graded or discrete?

Most research on mental lexical representations (lemmas) assumes they are discrete and correspond in number to a word's number of distinct meanings. Thus, homophones (bat), whose meanings are unrelated, have separate lemmas for each meaning (one for baseball bat, another for flying bat), whereas polysemes (paper), whose senses are related, have shared lemmas (the same lemma for printer paper and term paper). However, most aspects of cognition are thought to be graded, not discrete; could lemmas be graded too? We conducted a preregistered picture-word interference study with pictures of words whose meanings ranged from unrelated (homophones) to very related (regular polysemes). Whereas semantic competitors to picture names slow picture naming, semantic competitors to non-depicted meanings of homophones facilitate naming, suggesting distinct lemmas for homophones' meanings. We predicted that competitors to non-depicted senses of polysemes would slow naming, as polysemes' depicted and non-depicted senses presumably share a lemma. Crucially, we aimed to examine the transition from facilitation to inhibition: two groupings (where competitors to non-depicted senses led to facilitation for words with two lemmas but inhibition for words with one lemma) would imply that lemmas are indeed discrete. But a transition that varies continuously by sense relatedness would imply that lemmas are graded. Unexpectedly, competitors to non-depicted senses of both homophones and polysemes facilitated naming. Although these results do not indicate whether lemmas are graded or discrete, they do inform a long-standing question on the nature of polysemes, supporting a multiple-lemma (vs. core-lemma) account.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
期刊最新文献
Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits. When is a causal illusion an illusion? Separating discriminability and bias in human contingency judgements. Advancing an account of hierarchical dual-task control: A focused review on abstract higher-level task representations in dual-task situations. The effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli. Is the precedence of social re-orienting only inherent to the initiators?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1