Prefixed Nouns and Verbs in Arabic: Evidence for Dual-route Processing in Auditory Word Recognition

Authors

  • Faisal Aljasser

    Department of English Language and Literature, College of Languages and Humanities, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7861
Received: 2 November 2024 | Revised: 30 November 2024 | Accepted: 3 December 2024 | Published Online: 17 December 2024

Abstract

The process of accessing and retrieving the morphological components of complex words during word recognition has led to the development of various models that explain morphological representation and processing. This area of research is particularly significant in the context of Arabic, where it has been suggested that lexical processing predominantly relies on root-based obligatory morphological decomposition, as opposed to stem-based processing. To investigate this proposal, we conducted an experiment focusing on morphologically complex prefixed words. These words were carefully matched for surface and stem frequencies, allowing us to isolate the variable of root type frequency, or family size, to observe its specific effects. We analyzed the impact of root type frequency on response times for lexical decisions concerning spoken prefixed nouns and verbs in Arabic. Our findings revealed that response times for lexical decisions were significantly influenced by root type frequency, but only for prefixed nouns. This suggests that the proposed model of root-based obligatory morphological decomposition may not be universally applicable to all types of prefixed words in Arabic. Instead, these results indicate a need for a more nuanced understanding of morphological processing, supporting dual-mechanism approaches over single-mechanism theories. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on morphological processing in language, particularly highlighting the complexities involved in recognizing morphologically rich languages like Arabic.

Keywords:

Morphologically Complex Words; Perception; Dual-Route Models

References

[1] Bertram, R., Schreuder, R., Baayen, R.H., 2000. The Balance of Storage and Computation in Morphological Processing: The Role of Word Formation Type, Affixal Homonymy, and Productivity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition. 26(2), 489–511. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.2.489

[2] Beyersmann, E., Kezilas, Y., Coltheart, M., et al., 2018. Taking the Book from the Bookshelf: Masked Constituent Priming Effects from Compound Words and Nonwords. Journal of Cognition. 1(1), 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.11

[3] Kirkici, B., Clahsen, H., 2013. Inflection and Derivation in Native and Non-Native Language Processing: Masked Priming Experiments on Turkish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 16(4), 776–791.

[4] Li, J., Taft, M., Xu, J., 2017. The Processing of English Derived Words by Chinese-English Bilinguals. Language Learning. 67(4), 858–884. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12247

[5] Taft, M., Forster, K.I., 1975. Lexical Storage and Retrieval of Prefixed Words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 14(6), 638–647.

[6] Taft, M., 1979. Recognition of Affixed Words and the Word Frequency Effect. Memory & Cognition. 7(4), 263–272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197599

[7] Taft, M., 2004. Morphological Decomposition and the Reverse Base Frequency Effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology. 57(4), 745–765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000477

[8] Butterworth, B., 1983. Lexical Representation. In: Butterworth, B. (ed.). Language Production. Academic Press: London, UK. pp. 257–294.

[9] Luce, P.A., Pisoni, D.B., 1998. Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model. Ear and Hearing. 19(1), 1–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199802000-00001

[10] Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 1987. Functional Parallelism in Spoken Word-Recognition. Cognition. 25, 71–102.

[11] Caramazza, A., Laudanna, A., Romani, C., 1988. Lexical Access and Inflectional Morphology. Cognition. 28(3), 297–332.

[12] Frauenfelder, U., Schreuder, R., 1992. Constraining Psycholinguistic Models of Morphological Processing and Representation: The Role of Productivity. In: Booij, G., van Marle, J. (eds.). The Role of Productivity. pp. 165–183.

[13] Baayen, H., Dijkstra, T., Schreuder, R., 1997. Singulars and Plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a Parallel Dual-Route Model. Journal of Memory & Language. 37(1), 94–117.

[14] Baayen, H., Schreuder, R., 1999. War and Peace: Morphemes and Full Forms in a Noninteractive Activation Parallel Dual-Route Model. Brain and Language. 68(1–2), 27–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2069

[15] Wurm, L.H., 1997. Auditory Processing of Prefixed English Words Is Both Continuous and Decompositional. Journal of Memory & Language. 37(3), 438–461.

[16] Wurm, L.H., 2000. Auditory Processing of Polymorphemic Pseudowords. Journal of Memory & Language. 42(2), 255–271.

[17] Rastle, K., Davis, M.H., New, B., 2004. The Broth in my Brother’s Brothel: Morpho-Orthographic Segmentation in Visual Word Recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 11(6), 1090–1098. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196742

[18] Taft, M., Hambly, G., Kinoshita, S., 1986. Visual and Auditory Recognition of Prefixed Words. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A. 38(3), 351–365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748608401603

[19] Grainger, J., Beyersmann, E., 2017. Edge-Aligned Embedded Word Activation Initiates Morpho-Orthographic Segmentation. In: Ross, B. (ed.). Psychology of Learning and Motivation. 67, 285–317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2017.03.009

[20] Zhang, X., Samuel, A.G., 2015. The activation of embedded words in spoken word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language. 79–80, 53–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.12.001

[21] Stockall, L., Marantz, A., 2006. A Single Route, Full Decomposition Model of Morphological Complexity. The Mental Lexicon. 1(1), 85–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.1.1.07sto

[22] Meunier, F., Segui, J., 1999. Frequency Effects in Auditory Word Recognition: The Case of Suffixed Words. Journal of Memory and Language. 41, 327–344.

[23] Schreuder, R., Baayen, H., 1995. Modeling Morphological Processing. In: Feldman, L.B. (ed.). Morphological Aspects of Language Processing. Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA. pp. 131–154.

[24] Balling, L., Baayen, H., 2008. Morphological Effects in Auditory Word Recognition: Evidence from Danish. Language and Cognitive Processes. 23(7–8), 1159–1190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802201010

[25] Lázaro, M., 2012. The Effects of Base Frequency and Affix Productivity in Spanish. The Spanish Journal of Psychology. 15(2), 505–512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/rev

[26] Holes, C., 2004. Modern Arabic: Structures, Functions, and Varieties. Georgetown University Press: Washington, DC, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2007.0094

[27] McCarthy, J., 1981. A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology. Linguistic Inquiry. 12(3), 373–418.

[28] Cohen, M., 1951. Chamito-Semitic Languages and Historical Linguistics. Scientia. 45.

[29] Boudelaa, S., 2014a. Is the Arabic Mental Lexicon Morpheme-Based or Stem-Based? Implications for Spoken and Written Word Recognition. In: Saiegh-Haddad, E., Joshi, R. (eds.). Handbook of Arabic literacy. Springer. pp. 31–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8545-7

[30] Boudelaa, S., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 2005. Discontinuous Morphology in Time: Incremental Masked Priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes. 20(1–2), 207–260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000106

[31] Boudelaa, S., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 2010. Aralex: A Lexical Database for Modern Standard Arabic. Behavior Research Methods. 42(2), 481–487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.481

[32] Boudelaa, S., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 2011. Productivity and Priming: Morphemic Decomposition in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes. 26(4–6), 624–652. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.521022

[33] Aldholmi, Y., Pycha, A., 2023. Segmental Contributions to Word Recognition in Arabic Sentences. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics. 59, 257–287.

[34] Gwilliams, L., Marantz, A., 2015. Non-Linear Processing of a Linear Speech Stream: The Influence of Morphological Structure on the Recognition of Spoken Arabic Words. Brain and Language. 147, 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2015.04.006

[35] Wray, S., 2016. Decomposability and the Effects of Morpheme Frequency in Lexical Access [Ph.D. Thesis]. Tucson, AZ: University of Arisona. pp. 1–135.

[36] Al-Omari, M., 2016. Topics in Arabic Auditory Word Recognition: Effects of Morphology and Diglossia [Ph.D. Thesis]. Winnipeg, Canada: The University of Manitoba. pp. 1–245.

[37] Alamri, A.A., 2017. Phonological, Semantic, and Root Activation in Spoken Word Recognition in Arabic: An Eyetracking Study. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistics Association; 27 May–29 May 2017; Toronto, ON, Canada. pp. 1–15.

[38] Taft, M., Hambly, G., 1986. Exploring the Cohort Model of Spoken Word Recognition*. Cogniton. 22, 259–282.

[39] Balota, D.A., Chumbley, J.I., 1984. Are Lexical Decisions a Good Measure of Lexical Access? The Role of Word Frequency in the Neglected Decision Stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 10(3), 340–357.

[40] Boudelaa, S., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 2015. Structure, Form, and Meaning in the Mental Lexicon: Evidence from Arabic. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience. 30(8), 955–992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1048258

[41] Marslen-Wilson, W.D., Welsh, A., 1978. Processing Interactions and Lexical Access During Word Recognition in Continuous Speech. Cognitive Psychology. 10(1), 29–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(78)90018-X

[42] Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 1984. Function and Process in Spoken Word Recognition- A Tutorial Review. In: Bouma, H., Bouwhuis, D. (eds.). Attention & Performance X. Lawrence Erlbaum: London, UK. pp. 125–150.

[43] Schenider, W., Eschman, A., Zuccolotto, A., 2002. E-Prime User’s Guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools. Available from: https://www.staff.universiteitleiden.nl/binaries/content/assets/sociale-wetenschappen/faculteitsbureau/solo/research-support-website/software/usersguide_e-prime2_28012019.pdf (cited 11 November 2014).

[44] Boudelaa, S., 2014b. The Differential Time Course for Consonant and Vowel Processing in Arabic: Implications for Language Learning and Rehabilitation. Frontiers in Psychology. 5, 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01557

[45] Boudelaa, S., Marslen-Wilson, W.D., 2013. Morphological Structure in the Arabic Mental Lexicon: Parallels Between Standard and Dialectal Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes. 28(10), 1453–1473.

[46] Vannest, J., Newport, E., Newman, A., et al., 2011. Interplay Between Morphology and Frequency in Lexical Access: The Case of the Base Frequency Effect. Brain Research. 1373, 144–159.

[47] Wurm, L.H., Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., et al., 2006. Dynamics of the auditory comprehension of prefixed words. The Mental Lexicon. 1(1), 125–146.

[48] Hermena, E.W., Liversedge, S.P., Bouamama, S., et al., 2019. Orthographic and Root Frequency Effects in Arabic: Evidence from Eye Movements and Lexical Decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition. 45(5), 934–954. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000626

Downloads

How to Cite

Aljasser, F. (2025). Prefixed Nouns and Verbs in Arabic: Evidence for Dual-route Processing in Auditory Word Recognition. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7861