Abstract
Speech detection and matching simultaneously presented printed and spoken words were used to examine phonologic and phonetic processing of Hebrew heterophonic homographs. Subjects detected a correspondence between an ambiguous letter string and the amplitude envelopes of both dominant and subordinate phonological alternatives. Similar effects were obtained when the homographs were phonologically disambiguated by adding vowel marks. The matching of the unpointed printed forms of heterophonic homographs to the dominant and subordinate spoken alternatives presented auditorily was as fast as matching the pointed unambiguous forms to the respective spoken words. This outcome was not obtained when print and speech were not presented simultaneously. These results suggest that printed heterophonic homographs activate the two spoken alternatives they represent and provide further confirmation for fast phonetic recoding in reading. Most studies of lexical ambiguity have examined the processing of printed homophonic homographs embedded in text or presented in isolation (e.g., Onifer & Swinney, 1981; Seidenberg, Tanenhaus, Leiman, & Bienkowski, 1982; Simpson & Burgess, 1985; Swinney, 1979). Homophonic homographs (e.g., bug) are characterized by an orthographic structure that has one pronunciation but two different meanings in semantic memory. Research with homophonic homographs has focused on whether the two meanings related to the orthographic structure are activated in parallel or whether one meaning acquires dominance at some stage after the presentation of the ambiguous letter string. Several studies have suggested that, even in a biasing context, all the meanings of a homograph may be automatically activated and retrieved (e.g., Onifer & Swinney, 1981; Seidenberg et al., 1982; Swinney, 1979; Tanenhaus, Leiman, & Seidenberg, 1979). In contrast, it has been shown that biasing contextual information affects lexical processing of homographs at an early stage, selecting only contextually appropriate meanings (e.g., Glucksberg, Kreuz, & Rho, 1986; Schvaneveldt, Meyer, & Becker, 1976). A third approach poses that exhaustive access that does not occur in parallel but is determined by the relative frequency of the two meanings related to the ambiguous word (e.g., Duffy, Morris, & Rayner, 1988; Forster & Bendall, 1976; Hogaboam & Perfetti, 1975; Neill, Hilliard, & Cooper, 1988; Simpson, 1981; and see Simpson, 1984, for a review).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.