Abstract
Research on morphology in word recognition has been plagued by conflicting results (McQueen & Cutler, 1998, give a recent review). Some findings suggest that words are accessed as full forms, while others suggest that words are accessed in terms of their component morphemes. The answer may lie in the properties of the affixes themselves: Kiparsky's (1982) Lexical Phonology and Morphology assigns affixes in English to different “levels” of attachment, based on their productivity, order of attachment, and phonological interaction with roots. We present data suggesting that productive, phonologically neutral, semantically transparent “Level 2” suffixes are “decomposed” for analysis in some cases, but that words with idiosyncratic, structure-changing, semantically opaque “Level 1” suffixes are not.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
