Reading homographs: orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics.
Reading homographs: orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics.
复制标题
阅读同形异义词：拼写、语音和语义动态。
DOI：
10.1037//0096-1523.25.2.561
复制
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
VanOrden,GC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gottlob,LR;Goldinger,SD;Stone,GO;VanOrden,GC
阅读过程中进行了比较，在3个词类型：同形异义词（单独的发音和意义，如铅），同音异义词（单数发音，但单独的意义，如春天），和控制词（如时钟）。在实验1中，命名反应时间显着慢于所有其他的话同形词。实验2和实验3采用联想判断任务，所指词与同音异义词和同形异义词的显性或从属意义相关。在实验2中，首先呈现同形异义词和同形异义词，然后呈现消歧联想词。在实验3中，呈现顺序颠倒。对于同形异义词，从属意义总是会产生性能成本。对于同音异义词，当上下文由前面的联想者提供时，这些成本就消失了。这些数据强调了语音信息在词义获取中的优先地位，并表明低水平和高水平的限制联合收割机共同塑造了词的感知。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2016阿帕，保留所有权利）
Reading processes were compared across 3 word types: homographs (separate pronunciations and meanings, such as lead), homonyms (singular pronunciations but separate meanings, such as spring), and control words (eg, clock). In Experiment 1, naming reaction times were significantly slower to homographs than to all other words. Experiments 2 and 3 used an association judgment task, with referent words related to the dominant or subordinate meanings of homonyms and homographs. In Experiment 2, homonyms and homographs were presented 1st, followed by disambiguating associates. In Experiment 3, presentation order was reversed. For homographs, performance costs always occurred for subordinate meanings. For homonyms, these costs vanished when context was provided by the preceding associates. The data underscore the priority of phonologic information in word meaning access and suggest that low-and high-level constraints combine to shape word perception.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)