重新审视英语词汇的语义歧义:非任意多义形式映射对词汇加工的影响。

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Greig I de Zubicaray
{"title":"重新审视英语词汇的语义歧义:非任意多义形式映射对词汇加工的影响。","authors":"Greig I de Zubicaray","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most English word forms convey multiple meanings, that is, they are semantically ambiguous. A relatively small proportion of these ambiguous forms are homonyms that convey distinct meanings (e.g., <i>bank</i> may refer to a financial institution or the land bordering a river), while the majority are polysemes that convey interrelated senses (<i>mouth</i> may refer to the mouth of a person or a river). Empirical investigations have demonstrated an advantage for polysemous word forms across various lexical processing tasks, suggesting differences in the way they are organized in semantic memory. However, polysemous forms also tend to be more frequent, comprise fewer phonemes and syllables, and occur in more dense neighborhoods involving more similar sounding words. The nature and extent of these systematic polysemy-form mappings and their influence on processing have yet to be fully investigated. The present study reports an analysis of a corpus of English monomorphemic words (<i>N</i> = 4,466), confirming that phonological features predict a significant proportion of variance (16.8%) in the number of senses conveyed by a word. A series of experiments using relative weight analyses of megastudy data sets of word recognition and production tasks demonstrates that these systematic polysemy-form mappings have a relatively important influence on lexical processing compared to other lexical and semantic variables. These findings suggest that polysemous word forms might be structured systematically to minimize cognitive costs and maintain a compact or kernel lexicon. Implications for current accounts of lexical ambiguity based solely on semantic similarity are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting semantic ambiguity in English words: Nonarbitrary polysemy-form mappings influence lexical processing.\",\"authors\":\"Greig I de Zubicaray\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xlm0001483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Most English word forms convey multiple meanings, that is, they are semantically ambiguous. A relatively small proportion of these ambiguous forms are homonyms that convey distinct meanings (e.g., <i>bank</i> may refer to a financial institution or the land bordering a river), while the majority are polysemes that convey interrelated senses (<i>mouth</i> may refer to the mouth of a person or a river). Empirical investigations have demonstrated an advantage for polysemous word forms across various lexical processing tasks, suggesting differences in the way they are organized in semantic memory. However, polysemous forms also tend to be more frequent, comprise fewer phonemes and syllables, and occur in more dense neighborhoods involving more similar sounding words. The nature and extent of these systematic polysemy-form mappings and their influence on processing have yet to be fully investigated. The present study reports an analysis of a corpus of English monomorphemic words (<i>N</i> = 4,466), confirming that phonological features predict a significant proportion of variance (16.8%) in the number of senses conveyed by a word. A series of experiments using relative weight analyses of megastudy data sets of word recognition and production tasks demonstrates that these systematic polysemy-form mappings have a relatively important influence on lexical processing compared to other lexical and semantic variables. These findings suggest that polysemous word forms might be structured systematically to minimize cognitive costs and maintain a compact or kernel lexicon. Implications for current accounts of lexical ambiguity based solely on semantic similarity are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001483\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001483","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数英语词形都有多重含义,也就是说,它们在语义上是模糊的。在这些歧义形式中,有一小部分是同音异义,表达了不同的意思(例如,bank可能指金融机构或河边的土地),而大多数是多义词,表达了相互关联的意思(mouth可能指人的口或河流的口)。实证研究表明,多义词形式在不同的词汇处理任务中具有优势,这表明它们在语义记忆中的组织方式存在差异。然而,多义形式也往往更频繁,包含更少的音素和音节,并且出现在更密集的社区,涉及更多发音相似的单词。这些系统的多义形式映射的性质和范围及其对加工的影响尚未得到充分的研究。本研究报告了对一个英语单形词语料库(N = 4,466)的分析,证实了语音特征预测了一个词所传达的意义数量的显著差异比例(16.8%)。通过对单词识别和生成任务的大数据集进行相对权重分析的一系列实验表明,与其他词汇和语义变量相比,这些系统的多义-形式映射对词汇加工具有相对重要的影响。这些发现表明,多义词形式可以系统地结构化,以最大限度地减少认知成本,并保持一个紧凑或核心的词汇。本文讨论了仅基于语义相似性的词汇歧义的当前解释的含义。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revisiting semantic ambiguity in English words: Nonarbitrary polysemy-form mappings influence lexical processing.

Most English word forms convey multiple meanings, that is, they are semantically ambiguous. A relatively small proportion of these ambiguous forms are homonyms that convey distinct meanings (e.g., bank may refer to a financial institution or the land bordering a river), while the majority are polysemes that convey interrelated senses (mouth may refer to the mouth of a person or a river). Empirical investigations have demonstrated an advantage for polysemous word forms across various lexical processing tasks, suggesting differences in the way they are organized in semantic memory. However, polysemous forms also tend to be more frequent, comprise fewer phonemes and syllables, and occur in more dense neighborhoods involving more similar sounding words. The nature and extent of these systematic polysemy-form mappings and their influence on processing have yet to be fully investigated. The present study reports an analysis of a corpus of English monomorphemic words (N = 4,466), confirming that phonological features predict a significant proportion of variance (16.8%) in the number of senses conveyed by a word. A series of experiments using relative weight analyses of megastudy data sets of word recognition and production tasks demonstrates that these systematic polysemy-form mappings have a relatively important influence on lexical processing compared to other lexical and semantic variables. These findings suggest that polysemous word forms might be structured systematically to minimize cognitive costs and maintain a compact or kernel lexicon. Implications for current accounts of lexical ambiguity based solely on semantic similarity are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

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
4.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信