1. The subject and goals of psycholinguistics

ON THE MENTAL LEXICON HEINZ VATER

1.

The subject and goals of psycholinguistics

1.0

Preliminary remarks After a brief introduction to psycholinguistics, I will describe

the mental lexicon (ML) on the basis of the representations by EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988), LEVELT (1989), SCHWARZ (1992; 19962) and HANDKE (1995) and then show that some of their claims concerning the organization of the ML and the structure of lexical entries have to be modified due to more recent research. In the beginning, I would like to describe the place of psycholinguistics within the realm of linguistics. Linguistics covers a vast area of topics and is divided into many subdisciplines including the nuclear areas (phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics), and interdisciplinary areas as phonetics, computational ling., mathematical linguistics, philosophical psycholinguistics.

linguistics,

textlinguistics,

neuro-.

and

Studi Linguistici e Filologici Online 4.1 Dipartimento di Linguistica – Università di Pisa www.humnet.unipi.it/slifo

Fig. 1

subdisciplines of linguistics Computational linguistics Mathematical lingustics

Phonetics

Phonology

Morphology

Semantics

Syntax

Pragmatics

Sociolinguistics

Language philosophy Neurolinguistics

Psycholinguistics

Text linguistics

1.1

Areas of psycholinguistics BIERWISCH

(1987:

646)

formulates

three

questions

psycholinguistics has to answer: [1] [2] [3]

What is knowledge of language? How is knowledge of language acquired? How is knowledge of language put to use?

[1]

concerns

the

static

("representational")

aspect

of

psycholinguistics, i.e. primarly the question how language is stored in

176


the human memory, whereas [2] and [3] concern the dynamic ("procedural") aspect. [2] characterizes the area of language acquisition, and [3] the area of language processing (speech production and speech comprehension). CHOMSKY (1986) mentions language loss (e.g. in aphasia) as a fourth area of psycholinguistics; this is also a section of neurolinguistics. Further areas concern: – – – –

the relationship between language and perception (cf. MILLER / JOHNSON-LAIRD 1976); the relationship between language and thought (WYGOTSKI 1964, HÖRMANN 1967, ENGELKAMP 1974); onomatopoesis and sound imitaion (cf. HÖRMANN 1967, XII); the neuronal base of language functions (cf. NAUTA / FEIRTAG 19889 and GESCHWIND 19889).

Cognitive Linguistics (CL) has been defined (a) as a subdiscipline of psycholinguistics concerning cognitive structures and processes (complementary to affective processes; cf. the schema by GRIMM / ENGELKAMP 1981: 18), (b) as linguistics under cognitive aspect (cf. BIERWISCH 1987 and SCHWARZ 19962). I prefer viewing CL as an interdisciplinary area (a), where linguistics meets cognitive science, since I hold that there is no need for a term characterizing linguistics as a cognitive discipline. "Cognition" can be defined, according to SCHWARZ (19962: 36) as "the set of all mental structures and processes comprising the total of human activities having to do with knowledge“. Perception, language and thought are cognitive systems belonging to the mental equipment of man. Fig. 2 gives a survey of the cognitive areas.

177


Fig. 2

cognitive systems and processes related to them Mind

Perception

vis. syst.

acst. syst.

tact. olfct. syst. syst.

vis. acst. proc. proc.

tact. olfct. proc. proc.

Language

gust. syst.

gust. proc.

Thought

lang.represent.

lang.processing

lang.loss

Mental Lexicon

speech production

speech recept.

language acquisition

other systems

Memory

SIS

STM

LTM

Abbreviations: acst. = acoustic gust. = gustatory lang. = language olfct. = olfactory proc. = process recept. = reception

syst. = system tact. = tactile vis. = visual LTM = long term memory SIS = sensory information storage STM = short term memory

Concerning the memory, ATKINSON / SHIFFRIN (1968) distinguish three stages: a sensory information storage (SIS), where a stimulus is stored only for a fragment of a second, a short term memory, where elements are processed from ca. 250 msec up to a couple of minutes, and a long term memory (LTM), being a permanent store (cf. 1.3 for greater detail).

178


There are specific processes associated with every system; e.g. speech production and reception processes are associated with the linguistic system. The systematic part of thought comprises memory (as a store of thoughts or thought structures), the mental lexicon forming a part of it. A person’s memory is built up gradually, and it can also be destroyed gradually. For FODOR (1983), perception and language are input systems, whereas thought (incl. argumentation, learning and problem solving) is considered to be a central system. FODOR (1983: 2ff) gives the following description of input systems: − Input systems are modality and domain specific. Domains are the areas of physical stimuli that are operated on in the specific modalities, e.g. light waves in the visual modality, acoustic waves in the auditorial modality. Central systems are neutral in relation to modalities and domains. − Input systems function quickly and automatically, whereas central systems are slower and less automatic; thought processes can be exerted in a conscious way. − Input systems are "encapsulated" according to FODOR (1983:2), whereas central systems have unrestricted access to data from memory as well as from input systems.

All this means that input systems are modular, central systems are holistic (CARSTON 1988: 43). As for myself, I do not think that language is automatic and reflex-like.1 Some phenomena speak against it: − Usually we have a choice as to how express a message. Thus, all sentences in (1-01) express the same state of affairs, but they do it in different ways as to the emotional attitude expressed in relation to it:

1

"Fodor (1985) talks of natural language parsing and visual processing as reflex-like; they are reflex-like in their automaticity and encapsulation. However, this analogy breaks down with regard to the other main property of reflexes, that is their direct unmediated response to the appropriate stimulus". (CARSTON 1988:42).

179


(01) a b c d e (02) a

The president passed away. The president deceased. The president died. The president kicked the bucket. The president croaked. Would you please leave me alone?

b Please, go! c Get lost!

− Slips of the tongue betray that the complex planning of an utterance can get mixed up on different steps; thus, (03)a concerns lexical planning, (03)b phonological realization: (03) a Das Haus verkommelt. (verkommt / vergammelt) (WIESE 1987: 50) "The house is wearing down" (i.e. tearing down / wearing out) b ... in the fast pew weeks (in the past few weeks) (FROMKIN 1973: 219)

1.2

Psycholinguistic tests as evidence of the Mental Lexicon Psychology is based on observations (cf. ARNOLD / EYSENCK /

MEILI 19918: 1369): Since precise single observations are not sufficient, at least two observations of the same phenomenon have to be compared. For the mental lexicon, tests from all areas of psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics have been applied: − − − −

Tests checking language production, tests checking language comprehension, tests checking language acquisition, tests checking the performance of people suffering from aphasia & Williams syndrome, − analysis of slips of the tongue and TOT phenomena, − positron-emission tomography (PET) and other methods applied in neuro-anatomy.

In all these cases, on-line as well as off-line tests have been applied. The analysis of slips of the tongue and of tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) phenomena constitute indirect methods primarily used to investigate speech production but can also tell us something about the organization and the functioning of the mental lexicon (which is

180


neutral as to speech production and comprehension). In online tests, the test persons themselves can be involved, e.g. choosing a certain type of utterance by pushing a button (cf. SCHWARZ 19962). In (04), the testees have to choose one of the two options as an adequate continuation: (04) a If you are a pilot, landing planes ... is /are dangerous. b If you are close to an airport, landing planes ... is/are dangerous.

There are several ways to carry through offline tests, e.g. by having the testees repeat some utterances or judge their grammaticality. As examples for slips of the tongue, (03)a concerns lexical planning, indicating that there must be a semantic as well as a morphological organization of the entries in the ML; the two entries that got mixed up (vergammeln and verkommen) are closely related in semantic respect, the first one expressing a deterioration of the outer appearance, the second one a deterioration of outer appearance or of inherent quality. At the same time, the two verbs are morphologically related by being derivates with the same prefix ver-. (03)b, showing a confusion in the phonological realization, is a case of metathesis. 1.3

The memory The memory is, according to SCHWARZ (19962: 35) "the storing

of ontogenetically acquired information". The ability of the human organism to store experience in a permanent way is the precondition for all complex behavioral activities (including thought processes). The structure of the memory has been investigated especially by ATKINSON / SHIFFRIN (1968). Their model contains three components:

181


Fig. 3

the memory memorizing

sensory information storage (SIS)

short-term memory (STM)

forgetting

long-term memory (LTM)

forgetting

The sensory information storage is an iconic storage storing visual or acoustic stimuli for a fraction of a second. WETTLER (1980: 16) describes an experiment, where visul stimuli, e.g. letters, were offered to the testees in a chessboard pattern for 50 milliseconds. Immediately after it, the same stiuli were shown in the same positions as the stimuli presented before. The testees have to tell whether the second stimulus is identical to the first one in the same position. The testees were able to do this. However, if the task is modified slightly, e.g. by replacing a small letter by a capital letter, the performance of the testee does not exceed the level of accidental hit or miss. According to MILLER (1956), seven elements (plus minus two) can be stored in the STM simultaneously. They remain there as long as you pay them conscious attention (cf. WETTLER 1990: 17). The information stored in the LTM is not just a copy of the memory trace in the STM. Thus, the representation of Schimmel does, in STM, not distinguish between "white horse" ("weißes Pferd" and "fungus" (Schimmelpilz"). In the LTM, for each of these homonyms a special trace is constructed; on the other hand, Schimmel1 and weißes Pferd

182


("white horse") have the same or similar representations: the LTM is considered to be a semantic memory. According to ATKINSON/ SHIFFRIN (1968) stimuli are transferred from the SIS into the STM, from there into LTM. They neglect the fact that the representation of a word in the STM (our working memory) obviously depends on knowledge (also concerning the social acceptability) stored in the LTM, which can be exemplified by "refusal of perception": The time span for the correct recognition of a word in brief visual presentation is higher for words that are socially tabooed than for neutral words (e.g. Arsch "ass" vs. Barsch "sole"). Inspite of this shortcoming, the model by ATKINSON/ SHIFFRIN (1968) was successfully used for the interpretation of many experiments (WETTLER 1980: 18). The main differences between STM and LTM are the following: –

The STM has a limited capacity, the LTM has an unlimited one.

–

The STM encodes primarily physical and phonological characteristics, the LTM semantic ones (cf. Schimmel).

–

Whereas the synthesis of certain protein enzymes plays an important role for the functioning of the LTM (as shown by experiments with rats that had to remember ways through a labyrinth), it does not play a role in the functioning of the STM.

According to SCHWARZ 19962: 87), concepts are the minimal entries of storage in memory, storing knowledge of the world.2

2

According to SCHWARZ (19962: 80), clinical observations show that the Hippocampus is responsable for long term storing of information. But on the whole, there is no distinct relation between local damages of the brain and the occurrence of disturbances of memory.

183


2.

The mental lexicon (ML)

2.0

General remarks The mental lexicon constitutes a central area of language

representation.

SCHWARZ

(19962:

35)

holds

that

"linguistic

competence is a system of knowledge, encoded in memorial traces". The human lexicon is, according to HANDKE (1995: 50) the central module of a language processing system, interacting with the other components of the language processor and containing detailed information concerning the words to be produced or comprehended. The mechanical lexica contain a section of the total vocabulary of a language (e.g. the weather-forecast lexica), whereas the mental lexicon (unless it has not been damaged by a lesion of the brain) contains the total vocabulary. CUTLER (1994: 81) emphasizes that a lexicon is acquired: "The contents of a lexicon are so patently language-specific that it goes without saying that a lexicon cannot be inborn – it must be acquired, on the basis of linguistic experience."

As to the entries of the lexicon, there is agreement on the fact "that the contents of a lexicon consist of sound-to-meaning mappings in discrete chunks" CUTLER (1994: 82). But what is the size of these "sound-to-meaning mappings"? Most linguists agree on words being the main type of entries stored in the ML. The word as a linguistic unit is not easy to define. A difference has to be made between inflectional words like child vs. children and lexical words like

184

CHILD.

There is more or less


agreement on lexical words (lexemes) rather than inflectional words being considered to be entries of the ML (cf. HANDKE 1995: 52). On the other hand, it is not easy to tell what has to be considered to be a lexeme.3 Homonyms are usually counted as two different lexemes. There are unproblematic cases like Eng. hole "hollow space" and whole "entire(ty)", which are differentiated in spelling or Ger. Bank1 (Eng. "bank") and Bank2 ("Eng. "bench") that are differentiated in their inflection (Banken vs. Bänke). Inflectional words as stateN and stateV have to be associated to two different lexemes for the same reason. The question how to differentiate between different lexemes has not been answered in a satisfactory way. For this reason, the number of words (lexemes) an average person has stored in the ML is a matter of disagreement.4 There are probably big differences between different speakers of the same language; the temporal factor plays a role as well, since every person learns new words or lexical expressions continually. Thus, we should assume that a person’s ML has changed more or less after reading a scholarly article or listening to a lecture.

3

4

A lexical word (lexeme), being an abstract unit can only be made audible (or visible) by using one of the inflectional words as its representative (e.g. the nom. sing. with nouns or the infinitive with verbs). AITCHISON (1987:6ff) assumes that a speaker of English knows between 50.000 and 250.000 words. What does it mean to know a word? "Knowing" is to be interpreted as comprehending; it concerns the passive vocabulary. There are no estimates concerning the active vocabulary – except that it forms a subset of the passive vocabulary.

185


Also morphemes (at least as constituents of regular words; cf. 2.2) have to be taken into account as storage entries, as well as idioms or "phraseolexemes" (cf. TOPCZEWSKA 2004).5 The structure of the ML is a matter of discussion too. Most models postulate modular lexical structures as well as (phonological, morphological etc.) subcomponents of the ML. Disturbances concerning specific areas of the lexicon are taken as evidence (cf. 1.3). Jean AITCHISON (1987) − cf. also AITCHISON (19984) − gives a declarative representation of the lexicon. In describing the "discovery trips" linguists have to carry out, she quotes a claim made by Sherlock Holmes: "'From a drop of water', said the writer, 'a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link of it.'" (Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet)

According to AITCHISON (1987), evidence relevant for the study of the ML consists of four types: – – – –

Word-retrieval problems of normal speakers, word-retrieval problems of speakers with language deficits, psycholinguistic experiments (association tests etc.), results of theoretiscal linguistics.

EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988: 145f) propose a model of the ML: –

The mental lexicon contains independent sublexica that specify different categories of lexical information – e.g. phonological, semantic and (with literate people) orthographic information. They are connected in a network (as shown by priming effects); in dyslexia, these connections are cut off.

5

FROMKIN / RODMAN (19935: 124) call the lexicon "a mental storehouse of information about words and morphemes".

186


–

The phonological units contain abstract phonemic representations. In speech production, the phonological chain must be transformed into a sequence of commands to the motor system. – Orthographic representations take regular and irregular spellings into account. − Morphologically related words are listed in one entry or in a cluster (cf. 2.2). – Lexical and grammatical morphemes are marked as such, as has been shown by differences in the ways they are processed. – In the lexical-semantic subcomponent words are grouped according to semantic features.

Detailed information concerning the structure of the ML is found in LEVELT (1989), in connection with language production. HANDKE (1995: 69) adopts Levelt's structure of lexical entries:

Fig. 4

ACCESS UNIT

Morphological Specification

(according to HANDKE 1995: 69)

Phonological Specification

lexical specification

Syntactic Specification

Form Lexical Pointer

Conceptual Specification

Lemma Unfortunately, most linguists dealing with the ML do not answer the question whether linguistic concepts are stored separately from cognitive concepts or together or as part of them (i.e. linguistic concepts forming a subset of general concepts).

187


2.1

Phonological structure of lexical entries According

to

EMMOREY

/

FROMKIN

(1988:145f),

the

phonological subcomponent contains lists that are organized according to onset segments and syllables (cf. the cohort approach). But there are also other organizations, e.g. according to mono- and polysyllabic words, frequencies of words, etc. LEVELT (1989) claims that the phonological structures furnished by Autosegmental Phonology consisting of a skeletal tier and a segmental tier provide adequate patterns for the phonological structures of lexical units: σ R O (05)

N

K C

C

C

V

b

l

I

t

s

ω

(06) σ

σ

R O

R

N

O

N

C

V

C

V

h

I

m

l

One of the reasons for the fact hat AP has been widely accepted among phonologists is the circumstance that there is no 1:1 correspondance between the two tiers: the affricate /ts/ has to be analysed as a sequence of a plosive and a fricative, because there is a difference in the features ([−continuous] with /t/, [+continuous] with

188


/s/, all other feature specifications being the same), whereas /ts/ behaves as a unitary entry in phonotactic respect (e.g. by having the same combinatory potential as /t/ or /p/). It has been shown that in slips of the tongue and the tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon, the phonotactic structure (i.e. the skeletal tier of AP) is maintained, whereas a replacement, omission or addition took place on the segmental tier. Thus e.g., when I could not find the name of the famous tenor Luciano Pavarotti, Ruggiero came to my mind as a first try, a name that has the same syllable structure and stress pattern as Luciano. Facts from early child language indicate that phonological representations stored in the ML are not necessarily identical to "spelled out" articulated sound sequences. WODE (1993, 1994) mentions cases where small children said [tat] instead of [ʃtat] but rejected the pronunciation [tat] offered by grown up people insisting on that they said [tat] rather than [tat]! This shows that their articulatory organs were not ready for the cluster [ʃtat] yet, although they had stored it in the ML.6 2.2

Morphological structure of lexical entries According to LEVELT (1989), the morphological structures of

simple or complex words are stored in the ML as shown in (07) − 6

JAKOBSON (1969: 23) reports a similar case, where a French speaking girl used torchon for garcon as well as for cochon, but protested when grown ups did not make the difference, using cochon for a boy or garcon for a pig.

189


(09).7 In this representation, roots of words are considered to be cyclic entities, which I doubt. I think that we need the traditional (cyclic) unit "stem" to count for the structure of derivates like (09). (07)

WORD

(08)

WORD

ROOT

ROOT AFFIX

ROOT

house

(09)

ROOT

AFFIX

nation

al

ity

WORD WORD

WORD WORD Straß

WORD

WORD

WORD

JOINT

ROOTN

ROOTV JOINT

en

bahn

halt

WORD e

ROOTN stelle

For EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988: 145f), it has not been decided yet whether morphologically complex words are listed as stem + affixes or as individual morphemes to be combined by rules. Recent morphological research seems to give an answer to their question: − CLAHSEN et al. (1991) found evidence for the so-called "dual route" model, according to which regular inflectional words like leb-t-e "lived" can be said to be combinations of (separately stored) morphemes (roots and affixes), whereas irregular forms like war "was", tat "did" or wurde "became" are not decomposed but rather stored as whole words. − PENKE / KRAUSE (2000) elicitated 20 irregular noun plurals and 49 participles (23 regular ones, 26 irreg. ones) from 2 German subjects who were diagnosed with William’s syndrome (WS). Eight unimpaired children served as controls. Subjects had to transform (i) a given 1.pers.sg. present form into a participle or (ii) a singular noun into its

7

WUNDERLICH/ FABRI (1995) offer different ways of morphological structuring.

190


plural form. The authors found that with regard to the default –s-plural, WS children show lower error scores compared to the controls (17% vs. 30%); in contrast, the distribution of errors for the irregular –er- and –nplurals show the reverse pattern (32% WS, 17% controls). Regular participle formation turned out to be intact (correctness scores being the same as those for the controls). In contrast to the English data by CLAHSEN / SONNENSTUHL (1999), both WS and control children achieve relatively low correctness scores for irregular participles (62% WS, 66% control). A clear difference, however, emerges when frequency is taken into consideration: 78% of the control’s errors occur with infrequent irregular participles; in WS children, 45% of errors result in overregularizations of frequent irregular participles. 8 − KOSTIKAS-TSELEPIS (2000) reports on a research project in which 22 Aromunian/Greek bilinguals were tested. Presented with Aromunian simple words, complex and ill-formed (prefixed and suffixed) nonwords, the testees accepted 99% of the well-formed novel words prefixed with palju- ("old/bad") as compared to only 36.66% of the novel words suffixed with the ornative suffix –osu. This means that "a decomposition process for affixed words is … operant, however to different degrees." − In their study of the mental representation of German compounds, ISEL / GUNTER / FRIEDERICI (2000) offered their 24 native German testees 160 compounds (40 transparent-transparent, 40 opaque, 40 transp.-opaque and 40 opaque-transp.). The testees responded by pressing one of two buttons of a response box. Left constituents were activated only for transp.-transp. and opaque-transp. compounds. The authors conclude that left constituents are not activated on-line and not processed before the processing of the head has been completed. The findings propose a hierarchical model with the transparency of the head being the crucial factor in determining the mode of lexical access. Decomposition only takes place when the head is transparent (cf. FRIEDERICI et al. 2000). − Neuro-anatomic procedures like the positron-emission tomography (PET) have been applied successfully to the functioning of the ML, e.g. in the study of verb morphology in English by JAEGER et al. (1996). The authors found that subjects produced the past tense forms of regular verbs significantly faster than irregular and that error rates for irregular

8

The papers by KOSTIKAS-TSELEPIS and ISEL/GUNTER/FRIEDERICI, are research reports printed in the documentation Second Intern. Conference on the Mental Lexicon. Montréal, 2000 (cf. references).

191


verbs were considerably higher than for regular or nonce past tense forms. Past-tense forms of regular verbs were computed on-line: Activation of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which had been shown in other studies to be involved in on-line behavior of intentional novel behavior, occurred only in the regular and nonce conditions, which can be interpreted such that this cortical area is involved in the computation of the regular rule. The hypothesis is that irregular past tense forms are computed by activating some aspect of lexical memory; the activation of the left middle temporal gyrus (involved with auditory memory traces) occurred only in the irregular task.

2.3

Syntactic structure of lexical units In speech production, an important step (after conceptualization

and lexical insertion) is the construction of a syntactic structure, into which lexical entries have to be inserted (cf. LEVELT 1989). The syntactic constructions have to take the syntactic properties of the lexical items into consideration. Since TESNIÈRE (1959), “valency” has been known to be the most relevant of these syntactic properties. It concerns the number and quality of linguistic elements a certain lexical entry can be combined with; valency is associated especially with verbs; but nouns and adjectives can have valency too. According to ÁGEL (1995), we have to distinguish between a valency potential associated with a lexical entry and valency realization depending on the valency potential of a lexical item and on the syntactic construction that has been chosen (cf. also VATER 2003). The verb to paint requires two complements, one of them designating the agent, the other one the theme. In an active construction, both complements are obligatory, the agent being realized as the subject of the sentence, the theme as its object: John

192


painted the wall. In a passive construction, only the theme is obligatory (as the subject of the sentence), whereas the agent can be realized by a PP (as a prepositional object) or be omitted: The wall was painted (by John). A verb can have several variants, each having its own valency, often also a specific meaning, like the German verb gehen “to go”. Since each of the variants can be inserted into different syntactic frames, a considerable amount of syntactic realizations arises: (10) a Paul geht zum Bahnhof. b Paul geht nach Amerika. c Paul geht zum Theater. d e f g h

'P. is walking to the station' 'P. is going (emigrating") to A.' 'P. is going to the theatre (i.e. becoming an actor)' Paul geht (zum 31.12.). 'P. is leaving (by the 31.12.)' Das Paket geht nach München. 'The parcel is sent to Munich' Die Uhr geht. 'The watch works' Der Roman von Walser geht ausgezeichnet (wie warme Semmeln). 'The novel by W. sells extremely well' Wie geht es? – Es geht. 'How is it going?' − 'Not (too) bad'

Each of the examples illustrates a different variant (with decreasing semantic similarity): Whereas gehen in (10)a means 'to walk' (i.e. 'on foot'), in b and c it still means moving but not 'by means of one’s feet'; variant a allows dropping of the directional adverbial, which is not possible with b or c; a − d express intentional movement as opposed to e (a parcel is not being moved by its own intention). In f , g and h no movement is involved: in f, geht means 'functions', in g, 'is sold'. In h, gehen occurs in impersonal constructions: the first sentence means 'how is it going?' and the second one 'more or less well' (Fr. comme ci, comme ça; Pol. tak sobie).

193


The only psycholinguistic study concerning syntactic information in lexical entries of the ML I could find is BROWN TESOLIN / DE ALMEIDA (2000).9 The task for the 25 participants was to provide a noun that would make two sentences serving as a frame conceptually plausible (as e.g. door in The person closed the ____ and The ____ closed as well as nouns that were impossible in that frame (as e.g. moon). Data from this experiment showed equal priming effects for both plausible and implausible conditions. The authors do not offer an interpretation of their results (maybe it is offered in ALMEIDA 2004, which was not accessible for me). 2.4

Semantic structure of lexical units According to SCHWARZ (19962: 35), experiments show that the

LM is subdivided semantically into subsystems equivalent to semantic fields as shown by the loss of sections of the vocabulary (like loss of the field of plant names) with people suffering from certain types of aphasia. What does the semantic structure of lexical entries look like? Basing herself on the types of evidence mentioned in 2.0, AITCHISON (1987: 72) holds that words are not composed of semantic primitives, but are rather connected "in a gigantic multi-dimensional cobweb".10 9 10

Paper printed in Second Intern. Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Montréal. A holistic hypothesis is also forwarded by LÖBACH (2000). Other psycholinguists analyze words semantically in (necessary and sufficient) features or in prototypes, like SCHWARZ (19962:88), dividing the concept of DOG into prototype features (including categorical information like IS AN ANIMAL), HAS FOUR LEGS, HAS A TAIL and CAN BARK. According to SCHWARZ (19962:85) it is not clear yet, "ob das mentale Lexikon nur sprachliches ... Wissen oder auch allgemeines Weltwissen beinhaltet" ("whether the mental lexicon contains only ling. knowledge or also general knowledge").

194


Concepts are not stored in isolation but in narrow relations with each other (cf. SCHWARZ 19962: 67). This is also true of linguistic concepts as entries of the ML. The cobweb is only partially similar to a semantic field as described by BAUMGÄRTNER (1967), where lexical entries are connected with each other by superordinates or subordinated semantic features (i.e. by hyponomy relations) or on the basis of their similarity (as co-hyponymes). AITCHISON (1987: 74f) assumes four different types of semantic relations: (11) – – – –

Relations among entries of the Mental Lexicon

SUPERORDINATION: COORDINATION: COLLOCATION: SYNONYMY:

orange − citrus fruit − fruit orange − mandarine − lemon orange − to peel oculist − eye doctor

Association tests as well as slips of the tongue and tip of the tongue (TOT) cases show that the concept

ORANGE

is in a narrow

relationship with superordinate nouns (like citrus fruit and fruit)11 as well as with co-hyponyms like mandarine and lemon, synononyms (like Ger. Apfelsine and Orange) and frequently co-occuring predicational concepts like KNIFE, TO PEEL, HAS A PEEL, IS JUICY etc.

11

Unfortunately SCHWARZ (19962) employs (like PIAGET 1928) the term "concept" for entities of thought as well as for entities of language (stored in the memory), whereas BIERWISCH (1983) postulates a difference (but does not give any details as to the different types of storage). STEINITZ (1968) shows, however, that not all kinds of superordinate nouns are equally natural, e.g. as anaphoric replacements: Auf der Straße lag ein Pudel. Der Hund / *das Säugetier / das Tier bellte mich an (On the street, a poodle was lying. The dog / *the mammal / the animal barked at me).

195


A fifth relationship should be added:

ANTONYMY

(cf. beginning

– end; warm – cold; rise – fall).12 LÖBACH (2000) shows, in a very interesting study that the assumption of "innate ideas" as suggested by Fodor and other representatives of Generative Grammar has to be rejected. Children form their first concepts on the basis of percepts before deriving other concepts out of these basic concepts. The author thinks that these concepts are holistic as to their semantics rather than composed of features or prototypes. Klaudia GROTE (2000) investigated whether the language modality (visual-gestural vs. auditory-vocal) affects the architecture and nature of the semantic lexicon and whether structural diversities of the lexicon influence memory processes.13 Signs and spoken words are produced and perceived in a completely different modality. Sign languages take full advantage of the parallel capacity of the visual system expressing information both linearly and simultaneously. The first study involved examining whether deaf and hearing subjects show different reaction times in a verification task where they had to judge the presence or absence of a semantic relation between two signs and two spoken words, respectively. The second verification task investigated whether the structure of the semantic lexicon was projected into the visual semantic system: Subjects had to judge line12

13

I noticed that antonymy is involved in slips of the tongue (produced by myself as well as by other persons) and in TOT phenomena. AITCHISON (1987) mentions antonymy but does not include it into her scheme. Paper printed in Second intern. conference on the mental lexicon. Montréal.

196


drawings instead of signs which were (1) not related, (2) associatively related to studied target, (3) associatively related + using a classifier which referred to target item. False recognition rate the best for (1), followed by (2), the worst for (3). A group of 20 native DGS-signers and 20 native DLS-speakers was compared. The author's hypothesis − strength of syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations within lexical organization of DGS and DLS vary with different language modality − was supported. Temporal and structural differences between signed and spoken languages have an effect on implicit or explicit activation of semantically related words and lead to different memory errors. The question whether we have to assume two lexicons in our mind, a mental lexicon containing linguistic units, and another lexicon containing non-linguistic concepts, has not been investigated thoroughly,

although

two

different positions concerning the

relationship between semantric and conceptual structure have been advocated: JACKENDOFF (1983) holds that "semantic structure is conceptual structure", whereas BIERWISCH (1983) thinks that both are related but basically independent of each other. In any case, there is evidence of the fact that, in language comprehension, the recipient needs linguistic knowledge as well as knowledge of the world both being in close interaction with each other. EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988: 146) assume that the mental lexicon does not contain knowledge of the world:

197


"The fact that cases of agnosia show a dissociation between lexical knowledge and nonlinguistic knowledge suggests that lexical knowledge should be represented separately from nonlinguistic knowledge (Damasio 1985, Newcombe 1985)." 14

This would confirm the approach advocated by BIERWISCH (1983). SCHWARZ (1992) holds that there is an "amodal" level in our mental representation where concepts are stored without being specified as perceptional, linguistic or purely notional. But this is a completely theoretical assumption, not based on empirical evidence. Also in this area, further research is necessary.

3.

Conclusions The overview of problems and results of studies concerning the

ML given by EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988: 144ff) has to be complemented (and partially modified) in several respects if we take results of more recent research into account: –

The mental lexicon of a language contains information about words, morphemes and/or idioms.

–

The information concerns the phonological form of a lexical entry (including phonological constraints), its morphological structure, its meaning (semantic representation), its combinatory potential (syntax), its orthographic representation (which I disregarded in this article).

14

According to ARNOLD / EYSENCK / MEILI (1991: 37) agnosia is a malfunction of recognition in spite of intact functions of the perceptual organs, intelligence and consciousness. A perceived object is not recognized, i.e. is not related to remembrance.

198


–

Based on these kinds of information, the speaker decides whether a phonic or graphic chain contains words really occurring in his language or potential words.15

− Recent research projects concerning morphology in language processing, language acquisition or language loss support the dual storage hypothesis, according to which decomposition takes place in transparent regular words, whereas irregular and/or non-transparent words seem to be stored as wholes (cf. CLAHSEN et al. 1991 and PENKE / KRAUSE 2000, where also problems concerning the dual storage are mentioned). − Concerning the syntax of lexical entries, the differentiation into valency potential (in the ML) and valency realization seems to be fruitful (cf. AGEL 1995, VATER 2003). In this area, there has not been done very much research; thus, a lot of work is still to do. − Concerning the semantics of lexical entries, there is agreement that entries are stored not in isolation but in close relations which each other. There is disagreement as to the nature of these relationships: whereas some linguists stick to semantic features (ordered within a network), others (like SCHWARZ 19962) prefer prototypes or "cobwebs" relating entries by relations of coordination, subordination, co-occurrence etc. (AITCHISON 1987 and 19984); still others like LÖBACH (2000) consider lexical entries to be holistic in semantic respect. Heinz Vater Universität zu Köln [email protected]

15

EMMOREY / FROMKIN (1988:144f) speak about "non-occurring nonsense forms". This is too general. Potential words like the derivate stealer ("one who steals") or the compound clearhead can be predicted because of their morphological regularities. Nonsense words may be potential words (formed according to morphological rules) like Ringelnatz' Tintenschwein "inkpig", or perversions ('Verballhornungen') of consisting words like Robert GERNHARDT’s Schleistgoß (from Schloßgeist "castle ghost") or "half legal" words like MORGENSTERN’s Gingganz as opposed to monomorphematic forms like MORGENSTERN’s Greule which are not likely to be used as words.

199


References Ágel, Vilmos (1995). Valenzrealisierung, Grammatik und Valenz. Zeitschr. f. germanist. Linguistik 234:2−32. Ágel, Vilmos (2000). Valenztheorie. Tübingen: Narr (= narr studienbücher). Aitchison, Jean (19984). The Articulate Mammal. An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. London: Routledge. Aitchison, Jean (1987). Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Oxford: Blackwell. Almeida, Roberto de (2000). Accessing arguments and conceptual fillers of verbs. Poster presented at the Second International Conference on the Mental Lexicon, Montreal, Canada. Almeida, Roberto de (2004). The effect of context on the processing of typeshifting verbs. Brain and Language 90: 249−261. Anderson, J.R. (1983). The Architecture of Cognition. Cambr./MA: Harvard University Press. Arnold, Wilhelm / Eysenck, Hans Jürgen / Meili, Richard (19918): Lexikon der Psychologie. Freiburg, Basel, Wien. Atkinson, Richard C. / Shiffrin, Richard M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In: Spence, K.W./ Spence, J.T. (eds.) (1968). Advances in the Psychology of Learning and Motivation Research and Theory, Vol. II. New York: Academic Press, 89-195. Baumgärtner, Klaus (1967). Die Struktur des Bedeutungsfeldes. In: Moser, Hugo (ed.) (1967). Satz und Wort im heutigen Deutsch. Düsseldorf: Schwann (= Sprache der Gegenwart 1), 165-167. Bierwisch, Manfred (1983). Semantische und konzeptuelle Repräsentation lexikalischer Einheiten. In: Růžička, R./ Motsch, W. (eds.) (1983). Untersuchungen zur Semantik. Berlin: Akademie Vl. (= studia gramm. XXII), 61-99. Bierwisch, Manfred, (1987). Linguistik als kognitive Wissenschaft. Zeitschrift für Germanistik 8, 645-667. Blumstein, Sheila E. (1988). Neurolinguistics. An Overview of LanguageBrain Relations in Aphasia. In: Newmeyer 1988, III:210–236. Bosshardt, Hans-Georg (ed.) (1986). Perspektiven auf Sprache. Interdiszipinäre Beiträge z. Gedenken an Hans Hörmann. Berlin: de Gruyter. Bühler, Karl (1934, 19652). Sprachtheorie. Stuttgart: Fischer. Caplan, David (1988). The biological basis for language. In: Newmeyer 1988, III: 237–255. Carston, Robyn (1988). Language and Cognition. In: Newmeyer (1988), III: 38-68.

200


Chomsky, Noam (1986). Knowledge of Language. Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger. Chomsky, Noam (1988). Language and Problems of Knowledge. The Managua Lectures. Cambridge, Mass: MIT. Clahsen, Harald / Eisenbeiß, Sonja / Vainikka, A. (1991). The Seeds of Structure. A Syntactic Analysis of the Acquisition of Case Marking. (= Arbeiten des Sonderforschungsbereichs 282), Nr.2. Clahsen, Harald / Sonnenstuhl, Ingrid (1999). Lexical entries and the rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 991−1060. Cutler, Anne (1994). Segmentation problems, rhythmic solutions. In: Gleitman, L. / Landau, B. (eds.), 81–104. Damasio, Antonio R. (1985): Prosopagnosia. In: Trends in Neuroscience 8:132–135. Emmorey, Karen D. / Fromkin, Victoria A. (1988). The mental lexicon. In: Newmeyer, F. (1988), III: 124–149. Engelkamp, Johannes (1974). Psycholinguistik. München: Fink (= UTB 297). Fanselow, Gisbert / Felix, Sascha, (1987, 19933). Sprachtheorie. 2 Bde. Tübingen: Francke (= UTB 1441/1442). Flores d'Arcais, Giovanni (1986). Konzeptuelle Strukturen und das mentale Lexikon. In: Bosshardt (1986):130-148. Fodor, Jerry A. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press. Friederici, Angela (1984). Neuropsychologie der Sprache. Stuttgart, Berlin, Köln: Kohlhammer. Friederici, Angela / Mecklinger, Axel / Schröger, Erich (2000). Working on working memory. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitäts-Verlag. Fromkin, Victoria (1971). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language 47: 27–52. Reprinted in: Fromkin, Victoria (ed.) (1973): 215–242. Fromkin, Victoria / Rodman, Robert (1974, 19935). An Introduction to Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Fromkin, Victoria (ed.) (1973). Speech Errors as Linguistic Evidence. The Hague: Mouton. Garman, M (1990). Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambr. Univ. Press. Garnham, Alan (1985). Psycholinguistics. Central Topics. London: Methuen. Geschwind, Norman (19889). Die Großhirnrinde. In: Gehirn und Nervensystem, 112-120.

201


Gleitman, Lila / Landau, Barbara (eds.) (1994). The Acquisition of the Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Görz, Günther (ed.) (1993). Einführung in die künstliche Intelligenz. Bonn: Addison-Wesley. Grimm, Hannelore / Engelkamp, Johannes (1981). Sprachpsychologie. Handbuch und Lexikon der Psycholinguistik. Berlin: Schmidt. Handke, Jürgen (1995). The Structure of the Lexicon. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Hörmann, Hans (1967). Psychologie der Sprache. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer (verbesserter Nachdruck 1970). Jackendoff, Ray (1983). Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Jaeger, Jeri J. / Lockwood, Alan / Kemmerer, David / Van Valin, Robert / Murphy, Brian / Khalak, Hanif (1996). A positron emission tomographic study of regular and irregular verb morphology in English. Language 72: 451−497. Jakobson, Roman (1969). Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp (= edition suhrkamp 330). Kleiber, George (1993). Prototypensemantik: eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr. Lang, Ewald (1994). Semantische vs. konzeptuelle Struktur: Unterscheidung und Überschneidung. In: Schwarz, Monika (ed.) (1994). Kognitive Semantik / Cognitive Semantics. Tübingen: Narr (= TBL 395), 25–40. Lenneberg, Eric (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Leuninger, Helen (1989). Neurolinguistik. Probleme, Paradigmen, Perspektiven. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Levelt, Willem J.M. (1989). Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Löbach, Brigitte (2000). Semantikerwerb. Ein Beitrag zu einer empiristischnaturalistischen Bedeutungstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer (= LA 423). Meibauer, Jörg (1995). Neugebildete er-Derivate im Spracherwerb. Ergebnisse einer Langzeitstudie. Sprache und Kognition 14: 138-160. Meibauer, Jörg / Rothweiler, Monika (eds.) (1999). Das Lexikon im Spracherwerb. Tübingen: Francke (= UTB Mittl. Reihe 2039). Miller, George A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63:81-97. Miller, George / Johnson-Laird, Philip (1976). Language and Perception. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Press.

202


Nauta, Walle J. H. / Feirtag, Michael (19889). Die Architektur des Gehirns. In: Gehirn und Nervensystem, 19889: 88-98. Newcombe, Nora (1985). Methods for the study of spatial representation. In: Cohen, R. (ed.). The development of spatial cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 277−300. Newmeyer, Frederick J. (ed.) (1988). Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey. Vol. III: Psychological and Biological Aspects. Cambridge, Mass. et al.: CUP. Penke, Martina / Krause, Marion (2000). German noun plurals − a challenge to the Dual-Mechanism model. Brain and Language 81: 303−311. Pinker, Steven (1994). The Language Instinct. New York: Morrow. Ramers, Karl Heinz / Vater, Heinz / Wode, Henning (eds.) (1994). Universale phonologische Strukturen und Prozesse. Tübingen: Niemeyer (= LA 310). Rickheit, Gert / Strohner, Hans (1993). Grundlagen der kognitiven Sprachverarbeitung. Tbg.: Francke (UTB 1735). Rosch, Eleanor (1977). Human Categorization. In: Warren, N. (ed.) (1977). Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol.1. London: Academic Press, 1-49. Schnelle, Helmut (ed.) (1981, 19902). Sprache und Gehirn. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp (= stw 343). Schwarz, Monika (1992). Kognitive Semantiktheorie und neuropsychologische Realität. Repräsentationale und prozedurale Aspekte der semantischen Kompetenz. Tübingen: Niemeyer (= LA 273). Schwarz, Monika (19962). Einführung in die Kognitive Linguistik. Tübingen: Francke (= UTB 1636). Second international conference on the mental lexicon. Montréal, Canada, Oct. 18–20, 2000. Sonnenstuhl, Ingrid / Eisenbeiss, Sonja / Clahsen, Harald (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition 72 (3): 203−326. Steinitz, Renate (1968). Nominale Proformen. In: Kallmeyer, Werner et al. (eds.) (1974). Lektürekolleg zur Textlinguistik, Bd. 2: Reader. Frankfurt/M.: Athenäum Fischer, 246-265. Stephany, Ursula (1994). Phonologische Gesetzmäßigkeiten der Kindersprache aus synchroner und diachroner Sicht. In: Ramers, K. H. / Vater, H. / Wode, H. (eds.), 205-222. Tesnière, Lucien (1959). Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.

203


Topczewska, Urszula (2004). Phraseolexeme in Paulusbriefen und ihre Wiedergabe im Deutschen und im Polnischen anhand ausgewählter Bibelübersetzungen. Trier: WVT (= Fokus 28). Vater, Heinz (1994). Linguistik – Natur- oder Geisteswissenschaft? In: Roggausch, W. (ed.). Germanistentreffen Bundesrepublik Deutschland – Polen. Tagungsbeiträge. Bonn: DAAD, 219-232. Vater, Heinz (1994, 20024). Einführung in die Sprachwissenschaft. München: Fink. (= UTB 1799). Vater, Heinz (2003). Valency and diathesis. In: Cuyckens, Hubert / Berg, Thomas / Dirven, René / Panther, Klaus-Uwe (eds). Motivation in Languages: Studies in Honor of Günter Radden. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins, 99–122. Vater, Heinz (2005). Referenz-Linguistik. München: Fink (= UTB 2685). Wettler, Manfred (1980). Sprache, Gedächtnis, Verstehen. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. Wiese, Richard (1983). Psycholinguistische Aspekte der Sprachproduktion. Hamburg: Buske. Wiese, Richard (1987). Versprecher als Fenster zur Sprachstruktur. Studium Linguistik 21:45-55. Williams, Edwin (1994). Remarks on lexical knowledge. In: Gleitman, L. / Landau, B. (eds.) (1994):7–34. Wode, Henning (1993). Psycholinguistik. Eine Einführung in die Lehr- und Lernbarkeit von Sprachen. München: Hueber. Wode, Henning (1994). Perzeption, Produktion und die Lernbarkeit von Sprachen. In: Ramers, K. H. / Vater, H. / Wode, H. (eds.), 169-187. Wunderlich, Dieter / Fabri, Roy (1995). Minimalist morphology: An approach to inflection. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 14: 236−294. Wygotski, L. S. (1964). Denken und Sprechen. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

204