Danny R. Moates

The Development of Word Recognition in a Second Language.

Do differences among first languages (LI) affect word recognition in reading a second language (L2)? Participants in this study had either Indonesian (an alphabetic language) or Chinese (a logographic language) as an L1 and were learning English (an alphabetic language) as an L2. Under the connectionist rubric, it was predicted that an alphabetic LI would facilitate word recognition in an alphabetic L2, especially if the LI and L2 have similar spelling patterns. Facilitation is relative to a logographic LI. The model also predicted a better recognition for high-frequency words in the L2 relative to low-frequency words. The results of a lexical decision task largely confirmed these hypotheses.

Familiar idiom comprehension

Sentences containing idioms used either literally or figuratively were presented repeatedly for 100 msec per presentation. Half of the sentences were preceded by a paragraph. The number of presentations required to read the sentences and cued recall of the sentences were recorded. The serial brief presentations method provided predictable and meaningful results. Sentences containing idioms used literally required more presentations than those containing idioms used figuratively. Cued recall was better for idioms used literally than for those used figuratively. These results are interpreted as support for the Idiomatic Processing Model of idiom comprehension, which suggests that the figurative meaning is processed first; only if that one is inappropriate is the literal meaning processed.

The feature [sonorant] in auditory word identification

The distinctive feature [sonorant] separates resonants and obstruents. Does this feature mark a difference in the perceptual processing of these consonants? Marks et al. [Marks et al., ‘‘Word reconstruction and consonant features in English and Spanish,’’ Linguistics, 40, 421–438 (2002)] showed such an influence in a word reconstruction task. Target words containing an obstruent segment were harder to reconstruct when the obstruent was replaced by a resonant (mismatch condition) than when it was replaced by another obstruent (match condition). Resonant target words showed no such effect. The present study extended Marks et al. (2002) using an auditory priming lexical decision task. Participants heard a nonword prime 50 msec prior to another word or nonword target. The prime differed from the target item in just one consonant which either matched the target segment on the feature [sonorant] or mismatched it. Listeners judged whether the target item was a real word or nonword. The obstruents were divided in...

The influence of the feature (sonorant) in lexical access in Spanish

Does the feature (sonorant) influence access to lexical entries? In current feature geometry, the feature (sonorant) is a root node feature, distinguishing resonants from obstruents. Marks, et al. (2002) demonstrated its influence in lexical access using the word reconstruction task in Spanish. Participants heard a nonword, e.g., dirmar, and were asked to change it into a real word (firmar) by changing just one consonant. Errors in recovering the correct word (firmar) were much higher when the word contained an obstruent that had been replaced with a resonant (nirmar) than when the word contained an obstruent that had been replaced by another obstruent (dirmar). Obstruent target words were easier to recover when the target segment and the replacing segment matched on the feature [sonorant]. Why do obstruents show this matching effect? The present study subdivided obstruents into stops and fricatives. Two experiments compared them separately to resonants in the word reconstruction task. Are fricatives alon...