Abstract
Word-types represent the primary form of data for many models of phonological learning, and they often predict performance in psycholinguistic tasks. Word-types are often tacitly defined as phonologically unique words. Yet, an explicit test of this definition is lacking, and natural language patterning suggests that word meaning could also act as a cue to word-type status. This possibility was tested in a statistical phonotactic learning experiment in which phonological and semantic properties of word-types varied. During familiarization, the learning targets—word-medial consonant sequences—were instantiated either by four related word-types or by just one word-type (the experimental frequency factor). The expectation was that more word-types would lead participants to generalize the target sequences. Regarding semantic cues, related word-types were either associated with different referents or all with a single referent. Regarding phonological cues, related word-types differed from each other by one, two, or more phonemes. At test, participants rated novel wordforms for their similarity to the familiarization words. When participants heard four related word-types, they gave higher ratings to test words with the same consonant sequences, irrespective of the phonological and semantic manipulations. The results support the existing phonological definition of word-types.
Highlights
Word-types are abstract wordforms that are typically defined in phonological terms, that is, as being composed of a unique set of phonemes
The other participants heard that sequence in the high experimental frequency condition, in four phonologically different familiarization words each repeated four times
There was a significant effect of English frequency, F(1, 173) = 43.27, p < .001, r = .20, with higher ratings being given to words containing low English frequency sequences, M = 4.42, than to words containing high English frequency sequences, M = 4.08
Summary
Word-types are abstract wordforms that are typically defined in phonological terms, that is, as being composed of a unique set of phonemes. In English, for example, hasty, pessimistic, and esteem are unique word-types that have the /st/ word-medial consonant sequence in common. To better understand why semantics might play a role in phonological acquisition, consider the following hypothetical situation: A child grows up consistently exposed to multiple. With respect to learning about the phonotactic sequence /st/, is it sufficient that these pronunciations are composed of different sounds for the child to treat them as different word-types, permitting each pronunciation to serve as evidence that /st/ is a licit English consonant sequence? Or, because they share a common meaning, would she treat each pronunciation as a variation on a single word-type and wait on evidence from additional words such as pessimistic and esteem to make a generalization about /st/? To better answer this question, we first turn to previous research on word-types
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have