Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T20:18:23.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lexical frequency and third-graders' stress accuracy in derived English word production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

LINDA JARMULOWICZ ,
VALENTINA L. TARAN  and
SARAH E. HAY
LINDA JARMULOWICZ*
Affiliation:
The University of Memphis
VALENTINA L. TARAN
Affiliation:
The University of Memphis
SARAH E. HAY
Affiliation:
The University of Memphis
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Linda Jarmulowicz, University of Memphis, School of Audiology and Speech–Language Pathology, 807 Jefferson Avenue, Memphis, TN 38105. E-mail: ljrmlwcz@memphis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the effects of lexical frequency on children's production of accurate primary stress in words derived with nonneutral English suffixes. Forty-four third-grade children participated in an elicited derived word task in which they produced high-frequency, low-frequency, and nonsense-derived words with stress-changing suffixes (i.e., -tion, -ic, -ity). Derived word frequency affected stress production accuracy; however, the individual suffix also played an important role in stress placement, with -tion productions more accurate than either -ic or -ity productions. For the real words, derived word frequency relative to stem frequency was related to performance. Stress was less accurate on derived words that were much lower in frequency than their stems (e.g., tranquil/tranquility) and more accurate on derived words that approximated or exceeded their stem frequency (e.g., motivate/motivation). In addition to derived word and stem frequency, results are discussed with reference to several phonological characteristics that may also influence stress production accuracy.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 213 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alegre, M., & Gordon, P. (1999). Rule-based versus associative processes in derivational morphology. Brain and Language, 68, 347–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58, 1–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archiuli, J., & Cupples, L. (2006). The processing of lexical stress during visual word recognition: Typicality effects and orthographic correlates. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 920–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H. R., & Lieber, R. (1991). Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics, 29, 801–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H., & Renouf, A. (1996). Chronicling the times: Productive innovations in an English newspaper. Language, 72, 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H., & Schreuder, R. (1999). War and peace: Morphemes and full forms in a noninteractive activation parallel dual-route model. Brain and Language, 68, 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrens, H. (2006). The input–output relationship in first language acquisition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 2–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word, 14, 150–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, D. C. (1979). Lexical representation of derivational representation. In Aronoff, M. & Kean, M. L. (Eds.), Juncture (pp. 37–55). Sarasota, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
Booij, G. (2002). The balance between storage and composition in phonology. In Nooteboom, S. G., Weerman, F., & Wijnen, F. (Eds.), Storage and computation in the language faculty. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Burani, C., & Arduino, L. S. (2004). Stress regularity or consistency? Reading aloud Italian polysyllables with different stress patterns. Brain and Language, 90, 318–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burani, C., & Caramazza, A. (1987). Representation and processing of derived words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2, 217–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burani, C., Marcolini, S., & Stella, G. (2002). How early does morpho-lexical reading develop in readers of a shallow orthography? Brain and Language, 81, 568–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burani, C., & Thornton, A. M. (2003). The interplay of root, suffix, and whole-word frequency in processing derived words. In Baayen, R. H. & Schreuder, R. (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 157–208). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlisle, J. F., & Stone, C. A. (2005). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 428–449.Google Scholar
Carlisle, J. F., Stone, C. A., & Katz, L. A. (2001). The effects of phonological transparency on reading derived words. Annals of Dyslexia, 51, 249–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). American Heritage Word Frequency Book. New York: American Heritage.Google Scholar
Casalis, S., Colé, P., & Sopo, D. (2004). Morphological awareness in developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 54, 114–138.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colé, P., Segui, J., & Taft, M. (1997). Words and morphemes as units for lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 312–330.Google Scholar
Columbo, L. (1991). The role of lexical stress in word recognition and pronunciation. Psychological Research, 53, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A. (1997). The syllable's role in the segmentation of stress languages. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 839–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dell, G. S. (1990). Effects of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological speech errors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 5, 313–349.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. L., & Baker, W. J. (1976). Morpheme recognition and the learning of rules for derivational morphology. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 21, 38–66.Google Scholar
Ford, M. A., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Davis, M. H. (2003). Morphology and frequency: Contrasting methodologies. In Baayen, R. H. & Schreuder, R. (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Freyd, P., & Baron, J. (1982). Individual differences in acquisition of derivational morphology. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 282–295.Google Scholar
Hay, J. (2001). Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics, 39, 1041–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, J. (2002). From speech perception to morphology: Affix ordering revisited. Language, 78, 527–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, J., & Baayen, R. H. (2005). Shifting paradigms: Gradient structure in morphology. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 342–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarmulowicz, L. (2006). School-aged children's phonological production of derived English words. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 294–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarmulowicz, L. D. (2002). English derivational suffix frequency and children's stress judgments. Brain and Language, 81, 192–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarmulowicz, L., & Taran, V. L. (in press). Exploration of lexical–semantic factors affecting stress production in derived words. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools.Google Scholar
Jarmulowicz, L., Hay, S. E., Taran, V. L., & Ethington, C. A. (in press). Fitting derivational morphophonology into a developmental model of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W. (1997). The discovery of spoken language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kehoe, M., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (1997). Truncation patterns in English-speaking children's word productions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 526–541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, D. J., & Windsor, J. (1996). Children's analysis of derivational suffix meanings. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 39, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. (2002). Language emergence. In Burmeister, P., Piske, T., & Rohde, A. (Eds.), An integrated view of language development—Papers in honor of Henning Wode (pp. 17–42). Trier, Germany: Wissenshaftliche Verlag.Google Scholar
Marchman, V. A., & Bates, E. (1994). Continuity in lexical and morphological development: A test of the critical mass hypothesis. Journal of Child Language, 21, 339–366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagy, W., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304–330.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2003). Probabilistic phonology: Discrimination and robustness. In Bod, R., Hay, J., & Jannedy, S. (Eds.), Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Plag, I. (2003). Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofs, A., & Baayen, H. (2002). Morphology by itself in planning the production of spoken words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 132–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rubin, H., Patterson, P. A., & Kantor, M. (1991). Morphological development and writing ability in children and adults. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 22, 228–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 353–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Selkirk, E. O. (1982). The syllable. In van der Hulst, H. & Smith, M. (Eds.), The structure of phonological representations. Part II. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Semel, E., Wiig, E., & Secord, W. A. (2004). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals—4. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Singson, M., Mahony, D., & Mann, V. (2000). The relation between reading ability and morphological skills: Evidence from derivational suffixes. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 219–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storkel, H. L. (2002). Restructuring of similarity neighborhoods in the developing mental lexicon. Journal of Child Language, 29, 251–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Storkel, H. L., & Morrisette, M. L. (2002). The lexicon and phonology: Interactions in language acquisition. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 33, 24–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1989). The acquisition of English derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 649–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1990). Use of derivational morphology during reading. Cognition, 36, 17–34.Google Scholar
Van Donselaar, W., Koster, M., & Cutler, A. (2005). Exploring the role of lexical stress in lexical recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 251–273.Google Scholar
Vitevich, M. S. & Luce, P. A. (1999). Probabilistic phonotactics and neighborhood activation in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 374–408.Google Scholar
Windsor, J., & Hwang, M. (1999a). Derivational suffix productivity for students with and without language-learning disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 220–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Windsor, J., & Hwang, M. (1999b). Children's auditory lexical decisions: A limited processing capacity account of language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 990–1002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wysocki, K., & Jenkins, J. R. (1987). Deriving word meanings through morphological generalization. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar