Relative entropy effects on the processing of spoken Romanian verbs
A multitude of studies show the relevance of both inflectional paradigms (word form frequency distributions, i.e.,
inflectional entropy) and inflectional classes (whole class frequency distributions) for visual lexical processing. Their
interplay has also been proven significant, measured as the difference between paradigm and class frequency distributions
(relative entropy). Relative entropy effects have now been recorded in nouns, verbs, adjectives, and prepositional phrases.
However, all of these studies used visual stimuli – either written words or picture-naming tasks. The goal of our study is to test
whether the effects of relative entropy can also be captured in the auditory modality. Forty young native speakers of Romanian
(60% female) living in Serbia as part of the Romanian ethnic minority participated in an auditory lexical decision task. Stimuli
were 168 Romanian verbs from two inflectional classes. Verbs were presented in four forms: present and imperfect 1st person
singular, present 3rd person plural, and imperfect 2nd person plural. The results show that relative entropy influences both
response accuracy and response latency. We discuss alternative operationalizations of relative entropy and how they can help us
test hypotheses about the structure of the mental lexicon.
Article outline
- Inflectional and relative entropy
- The current study
- Method
- Participants
- Stimuli
- Procedure
- Data analysis
- Results
- Response accuracy
- Response latency
- Discussion
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Author note
-
References
References (48)
References
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H., & Milin, P. (2010). Analyzing reaction times. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(2), 12–28. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Filipović Đurđević, D., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 118(3), 438. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baayen, R. H., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (2005). Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language, 81(3), 666–698. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bertram, R., Laine, M., Baayen, R. H., Schreuder, R., & Hyönä, J. (2000). Affixal homonymy triggers full-form storage, even with inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language. Cognition, 74(2), B13–B25. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blevins, J. P. (2003). Stems and paradigms. Language, 79(4), 737–767. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Box, G. E., & Cox, D. R. (1964). An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 261, 211–252. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ek, U., Fellenius, K., & Jacobson, L. (2003). Reading acquisition, cognitive and visual development, and self-esteem in four children with cerebral visual impairment. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 97(12), 741–754. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M., & Cutler, A. (2015). BALDEY: A database of auditory lexical decisions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(8), 1469–1488. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ernestus, M., & Warner, N. (2011). An introduction to reduced pronunciation variants. Journal of Phonetics, 39(SI), 253–260. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ferrand, L., Méot, A., Spinelli, E., New, B., Pallier, C., Bonin, P., Dufau, S., Mathôt, S., & Grainger, J. (2018). MEGALEX: A megastudy of visual and auditory word recognition. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1285–1307. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filipović Đurđević, D., & Gatarić, I. (2018). Simultaneous effects of inflectional paradigms and classes in processing of Serbian verbs. Psihologija, 51(3), 259–288. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filipović Đurđević, D., & Milin, P. (2019). Information and learning in processing adjective inflection. Cortex, 1161, 209–227. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goh, W. D., Yap, M. J., Lau, M. C., Ng, M. M., & Tan, L.-C. (2016). Semantic richness effects in spoken word recognition: A lexical decision and semantic categorization megastudy. Frontiers in Psychology, 71, 976. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldinger, S. D. (1996). Auditory lexical decision. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11(6), 559–568. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gönczöl, R. (2007). Romanian: An essential grammar. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hay, J. B., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 342–348. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hendrix, P., Bolger, P., & Baayen, H. (2017). Distinct ERP signatures of word frequency, phrase frequency, and prototypicality in speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(1), 128.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hockett, C. F. (1954). Two models of grammatical description. Word, 10(2–3), 210–234. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kemps, R., Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, H. (2004). Processing reduced word forms: The suffix restoration effect. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 117–127. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Keuleers, E., & Balota, D. A. (2015). Megastudies, crowdsourcing, and large datasets in psycholinguistics: An overview of recent developments. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(8), 1457–1468. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kostić, A., Marković, T., & Baucal, A. (2003). Inflectional morphology and word meaning: Orthogonal or co-implicative cognitive domains? In R. H. Baayen & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 1–44). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lagrou, E., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2011). Knowledge of a second language influences auditory word recognition in the native language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 952.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindblom, B. (1990). Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. In Speech production and speech modelling (pp. 403–439). Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindgren, S.-A., & Laine, M. (2011). Multilingual dyslexia in university students: Reading and writing patterns in three languages. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 25(9), 753–766. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lorentzen, P., Nenadić, F., Kelley, M. C., & Tucker, B. V. (2019). Massive auditory lexical decision: Investigating performance in noisy environments. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, 1–4. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Magnuson, J. S., Mirman, D., & Harris, H. D. (2012). Computational models of spoken word recognition. In M. Spivey, M. Joanisse, & KenMcRae (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 76–103). Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2020). Recognition times for 62 thousand English words: Data from the English Crowdsourcing Project. Behavior Research Methods, 521, 741–760. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Milin, P., Filipović Ðurđević, D., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (2009). The simultaneous effects of inflectional paradigms and classes on lexical recognition: Evidence from Serbian. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(1), 50–64. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morris, J., Porter, J. H., Grainger, J., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). Effects of lexical status and morphological complexity in masked priming: An ERP study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(4–6), 558–599. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., Kostić, A., & Baayen, R. H. (2004). Putting the bits together: An information theoretical perspective on morphological processing. Cognition, 94(1), 1–18. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (2008). Shortlist B: A Bayesian model of continuous speech recognition. Psychological Review, 115(2), 357. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Norris, D., McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (2000). Merging information in speech recognition: Feedback is never necessary. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 231, 299–325. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Podlubny, R. G., Nearey, T. M., Kondrak, G., & Tucker, B. V. (2018). Assessing the importance of several acoustic properties to the perception of spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143(4), 2255–2268. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Core Team. (2018). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 241–255. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime: User’s guide. Psychology Software Incorporated.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taft, M. (1979). Recognition of affixed words and the word frequency effect. Memory & Cognition, 7(4), 263–272. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tucker, B. V., Brenner, D., Danielson, D. K., Kelley, M. C., Nenadić, F., & Sims, M. (2019). The massive auditory lexical decision (MALD) database. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1187–1204. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tufiş, D., Ion, R., Ceauşu, A., & Ştefănescu, D. (2008). RACAI’s Linguistic Web Services. Proceedings of the 6th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference – LREC, 28–30.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Rij, J., Wieling, M., Baayen, R. H., & van Rijn, H. (2017). itsadug: Interpreting Time Series and Autocorrelated Data Using GAMMs.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vitevitch, M. S., & Luce, P. A. (1998). When words compete: Levels of processing in perception of spoken words. Psychological Science, 9(4), 325–329. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Weber, A., & Scharenborg, O. (2012). Models of spoken-word recognition. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 3(3), 387–401. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wood, S. N. (2011). Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (B), 73(1), 3–36. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yates, M., Locker, L., & Simpson, G. B. (2004). The influence of phonological neighborhood on visual word perception. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(3), 452–457. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.