5.2 L INGUISTIC I NFLUENCES IN L EXICAL O RGANIZATION
5.2.4 Networks between Linguistic Influences
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
5.2.4 Networks between Linguistic Influences
The result of the interaction between each linguistic features will be interpreted in this section including frequency, semantics, phonology, parts-of-speech and characters (please refer to Appendix III for the detailed labels and classifications of each linguistic features to the responses of associations).
First of all, as mentioned in the section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2, the frequency effect presents within the responses of associations, the sematic relation, and syntactic relations, in which the frequency level of the responses is associated from that of the stimuli leading to a shared tendency of distribution between responded nouns and verbs. Also, the distribution of the target syntactic category is associated to that of the responses as well as the semantic relations between word pairs. As for the semantic and phonological interaction, semantic relation (64.8%; 263/406) demonstrates a domain than other types of relation between word pairs, which imply the semantic-oriented organization in the Taiwan Mandarin lexicon during association. However, besides the relation between word pairs, if we consider how a response is associated by the target word regardless syllable types, the identical syllable across the syllable boundary and also the effect of character can also take into account of the lexical organization during associations shown as Table 5-2-4 below.
Table 5-2-1. The distributions of each linguistic features between word pairs of associations regardless syllable types
Relation Number Total
Semantic + 393
- 13 406
Phonology + 133
406
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Parts-of-speech + 216 - 156 372
Character + 72
- 334 406
In general, there are 96.8% of sematic relation (393/406), 32.8% of phonological relation (133/406), 58.1% of parts-of-speech relation (216/372), and 17.7% of shared character between word-pairs (72/406) during associations. The high proportion of the semantic relation which results differently against the evidence found by previous studies of speech errors may also account the free word association tasks employed in the present study.
Which is worthy to notice is that although the distractions from the Mandarin characters were gotten rid of in the present study by presenting stimuli with MPS, the influences of the lexicography still demonstrate when the same character is shared between the word pairs as well as the association directly from the characters. For example, three responses are associated by three of the participants from the target word 潛 能 ‘potentiality’
[tɕʰjɛn35nəŋ35] as 漁夫 ‘fisherman’ [y35fu55] and 捕捉 ‘catch’ [pu21tswɔ55], and 海洋
‘ocean’ [xaj21jaŋ35], respectively. All of the three participants mentioned the radical of the first syllable which is related to ‘water’ as the association trigger, and only the lexicographical encoding from the Mandarin characters involved in the process of lexical access can explain this phenomenon, which attests the model with character level in Mandarin proposed by Hsieh (2006, 2016).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER SIX. CONCLUSION
This study aims to provide an outline of the lexical organization in Taiwan Mandarin by free word associations with the possible linguistic influences carefully considered including frequency, imageability, lexical categories, and phonological features.
With previous studies of mental lexicon presenting the concept of a primed activation spreading within mental networks, initialness in the phonological connections is therefore proposed to be the domain in Indo-European lexicon. However, regarding rich semantic representation by its lexicographic system in Mandarin, the present study in turn conducts free word association tasks to investigate the connections between associations within mental networks, and discusses the tendency of lexical organization with the interaction between linguistic influences in Taiwan Mandarin lexicon.
After data collection from ten Taiwan Mandarin native speakers (age mean= 23.8 years old; SD= 1.9; 5 males and 5 females) given forty-two disyllabic nouns and verbs as target words in association tasks, an association index with total of 406 responses is constructed in the present study with annotation of each linguistic features accounted. The findings from the annotated data suggest a semantic tendency of lexical organization in Taiwan Mandarin, and the linguistic features do interact with each other, and affect the organization within the networks. Similar results are shown between the previous research and the present study in semantic relations; while in the phonological networks, rhymes seemingly put more influences in the Taiwan Mandarin lexicon, in which a further study is suggested. Also, character encoding in mental networks during lexical access is attested in the present study. The findings may contribute to the further research on mental lexicon
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Several insufficiencies of the present study should be mentioned and discussed here.
Since the small scale of the experiment with limited observations by few participants, the results may not authentically represent as the majority; therefore, an expansion of the research is required. Second, though the researcher has already paid carefully attention to reduce variabilities for the psycholinguistic experiment, some possible factors may still probably affect the experimental results. Also, regarding the single psycholinguistic experiment included in the present study, i.e., free word associations with visual stimuli and oral responses, the results may not be able to provide a completely psycholinguistic aspect for the Taiwan Mandarin lexicon. Further investigations with more experiments to cover more factors is thus suggested. Since the index is constructed by the free word association tasks, the responses are not limited to words in which phrases were collected as well; therefore, the future application of the index should take this fact into consideration.
Though the Academic Sinica Balanced Corpus 3.0 (Sinica Corpus), which is referred as the basis of the parts-of-speech tagging (POS) in the present study probably cannot represent the exactly current language phenomena in Taiwan Mandarin, it contains five million words with a user-friendly search interface, and it is also the first fully POS-tagged balanced Chinese Corpus including 46 different tags. Also, as mentioned in Tang and Wan (2019), Sinica Corpus is commonly applied in some large-scale corpora such as the Linguistic Data Consortium (Ma & Huang, 2006), and shares great similitude with different methodologies from other corpora such as the Peking University corpus (Huang et al, 2008); therefore, the Sinica Corpus 3.0 should be eligible for the present study.
Although the researcher focuses on the evidence-based research with the foundation of theories followed in the present study, some of the analyses such as semantic and
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
phonological relations were determined by the researcher without the exact example or evidence provided in literature, e.g., certain idiomatic usages during word associations, which may cause a subjective viewpoint. Finally, many details have still been analyzed yet to fulfill a more complete exploration to Taiwan Mandarin lexicon such as the concreteness and abstractness during lexical association, phonological networks, and other factors unable to be included in the present study. Therefore, further investigations contributing to Taiwan Mandarin mental lexicon as well as phonological networks in other tonal languages with larger research and experiments across languages are suggested.
‧
Aitchison, J. 2012. Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. John Wiley
& Sons.
Aldridge, M., Fontaine, L., Bowen, N., & Smith, T. 2018. A new perspective on word association: how keystroke logging informs strength of word association.
WORD, 64(4), 218-234.
Beckage, N. M., & Colunga, E. 2016. Language networks as models of cognition:
Understanding cognition through language. In Towards a Theoretical Framework for Analyzing Complex Linguistic Networks, 3-28. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Bock, K., & Levelt, W. J. 1994. Language production: Grammatical encoding (pp.
945-984). Academic Press.
Caplan, J. B., & Madan, C. R. 2016. Word imageability enhances association-memory by increasing hippocampal engagement. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(10), 1522-1538.
Chan, S. W. (Ed.). 2016. The Routledge encyclopedia of the Chinese language. Routledge.
Chang, Y. L., Wu, J. Y., Chen, H. C., & Wu, C. L. 2016. The Development of Chinese Radical Remote Associates Test. Psychological Testing (63), 1, 59-81.
Chen, J. Y., Chen, T. M., & Dell, G. S. 2002. Word-form encoding in Mandarin
Chinese as assessed by the implicit priming task. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(4), 751-781.
Chen, J. Y., & Li, C. Y. 2011. Word form encoding in Chinese word naming and word typing. Cognition, 121(1), 140-146.
Chinese Knowledge Information Processing Group (CKIP). Technical Report no.93- 05, Academia Sinica, Taiwan.
Chinese Knowledge Information Processing Group (CKIP). Extended-HowNet (E- HowNet) 2.0. Academia Sinica, Taiwan.
Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. 1975. A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological review, 82(6), 407.
Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. 1969. Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 8(2), 240-247.
De Deyne, S., & Storms, G. 2008. Word associations: Network and semantic
‧
properties. Behavior Research Methods, 40(1), 213-231.
De Deyne, S., Navarro, D. J., & Storms, G. 2013. Better explanations of lexical and semantic cognition using networks derived from continued rather than single-word associations. Behavior research methods, 45(2), 480-498.
De Deyne, S., Verheyen, S., & Storms, G. 2016. Structure and organization of the
mental lexicon: A network approach derived from syntactic dependency relations and word associations. In Towards a theoretical framework for analyzing complex linguistic networks (pp. 47-79). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
De Groot, A. M. 1989. Representational aspects of word imageability and word
frequency as assessed through word association. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(5), 824.
De Simone, F., & Collina, S. 2016. The Picture–Word Interference Paradigm:
Grammatical Class Effects in Lexical Production. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 45(5), 1003-1019.
De Young, K. P., Lavender, J. M., Washington, L. A., Looby, A., & Anderson, D. A.
2010. A controlled comparison of the word repeating technique with a word association task. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry, 41(4), 426-432.
Dell, G. S. 1985. Positive Feedback in Hierarchical Connectionist Models: Applications to Language Production 1. Cognitive Science, 9(1), 3-23.
Dell, G. S. 1986. A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological review, 93(3), 283.
Dell, G. S. 1988. The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Tests of predictions from a connectionist model. Journal of memory and language, 27(2), 124-142.
Dell, G. S. 1990. Effects of frequency and vocabulary type on phonological speech errors. Language and cognitive processes, 5(4), 313-349.
Dell, G. S., Chang, F., & Griffin, Z. M. 1999. Connectionist models of language production:
Lexical access and grammatical encoding. Cognitive Science, 23(4), 517-542.
Dell, G. S., Oppenheim, G. M., & Kittredge, A. K. 2008. Saying the right word at the right time: Syntagmatic and paradigmatic interference in sentence
‧
Dell, G. S., & O'Seaghdha, P. G. 1991. Mediated and convergent lexical priming in language production: A comment on Levelt et al (1991).
Dell, G. S., & O'Seaghdha, P. G. 1992. Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42(1-3), 287-314.
Dell, G. S., Reed, K. D., Adams, D. R., & Meyer, A. S. 2000. Speech errors,
phonotactic constraints, and implicit learning: a study of the role of experience in language production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1355.
Duanmu, S. 1990. A formal study of syllable, tone, stress and domain in Chinese Languages, Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Duanmu, S. 2000. The Phonology of Standard Chinese. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Entwisle, D.R. 1966. Word associations of young children. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Greidanus, T. and L. Nienhuis. 2001. Testing the quality of word knowledge in a second language by means of word associations: types of distractors and types of associations. The Modern Language Journal 85.4: 567–77.
Forster, K. I. 1976. Accessing the mental lexicon. In R. Wales & E. Walker (Eds.), New approaches to language mechanisms. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Fromkin, V. A. 1971. The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 27- 52.
Garrett, M.F. 1975. Syntactic process in sentence production In G. Bower (Ed.).
Psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. 9:133-177.
Hsieh, S. K. 2006. Hanzi, concept and computation: A preliminary survey of Chinese characters as a knowledge resource in NLP (doctoral dissertation). Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen.
Hsieh, S. K. 2016. Chinese Semantics. In: Sin-Wai Chan (ed). The Routledge Encyclopedia of the Chinese Language.
Hu, J. F., Chen, Y.C., Zhuo, S.L., Chen, H. C., Chang, Y. L., & Sung, Y. T. 2017. Word Association Norms and Associated Responses: Reference Index for 1200 Two- Character Chinese Words. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 49(1), 137-160.
Huang, C. R., Lee, L. H., Qu, W., Hong, J. F., & Yu, S. 2008. Quality Assurance of
‧
Automatic Annotation of Very Large Corpora: A Study based on Heterogeneous Tagging Systems. LREC 2008. 2725-2729.
Huang, C. R. & Hsieh, S. K. 2015. Chinese Lexical Semantics. In: William S-Y Wang and Chaofen Sun (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Chinese Linguistics. ISBN: 978-0-19-985633-6. Oxford University Press.
Huang, C. R., Chen K. J., Chang, L. P. & Hsu, H. L. 1995. An introduction to
Academia Sinica Balanced Corpus. [In Chinese]. Proceedings of ROCLING VIII 81-99.
Huang, P.S., Chen, H. C., Huang, H. C., & Liu, C. H. 2009. The Development of
Divergent Thinking Test of Word Associative Strategy (DTTWAS). Psychological Testing, 56(2), 153-177.
Huang, P. S., Chen, H. C., & Liu, C. H. 2012. The development of Chinese word
remote associates test for college students. Psychological Testing, 59(4), 581-607.
Jarema, G., & Libben, G. 2007. The mental lexicon: core perspectives. BRILL.
Kittredge, A. K., Dell, G. S., Verkuilen, J., & Schwartz, M. F. 2008. Where is the effect of frequency in word production? Insights from aphasic picture-naming errors. Cognitive neuropsychology, 25(4), 463-492.
Lee, H. Y. (李孝儀). 2014. The Analysis of Chinese Word Remote Associates Test Among High School Students in Taiwan, Master Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Lee, J. (李杰). 2012. 英—漢雙語心理詞典詞彙聯想測試研究, Master Thesis, Xihua University, China.
Lee, H. M., & Lee, Y. S. 2011. Emotionality ratings and free-association norms of 267 common two-character chinese words. Formosa Journal of Mental Health,24(4), 495-524.
Levelt, W. J. 1983. Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14(1), 41-104.
Levelt. W. J. 1989. Speaking: From informtion to arriculation Cambridge. MA: MlT Press.
Levelt, W. J. 1993. Speaking: From intention to articulation (Vol. 1). MIT press.
Ma, W. Y., & Huang, C. R. 2006. Uniform and Effective Tagging of a Heterogeneous Giga-word Corpus. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language
‧
Ma, W. Y., & Shih, Y. Y. 2018. Extended HowNet 2.0–An Entity-Relation Common- Sense Representation Model. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2018).
Malhi, S. K. 2018. Processing Concrete and Abstract Relationships in Word Pairs.
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. 1981. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375.
Mednick, S. 1962. The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological review, 69(3), 220.
Meyer, AS. 1991. The time course of phonological encoding in language production:
Phonological encoding inside a syllable. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 69-89.
Meyer, A.S., & Dell, G.S. 1993. An experimental analysis of positional and phonotactic Morton, J. 1969. Interaction of information in word recognition. Psychological
review, 76(2), 165.
Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. 2004. The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 402-407.
Nissen, H. B., & Henriksen, B. 2006. Word class influence on word association test results 1. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 389-408.
Nozari, N., Kittredge, A. K., Dell, G. S., & Schwartz, M. F. 2010. Naming and
repetition in aphasia: Steps, routes, and frequency effects. Journal of memory and language, 63(4), 541-559.
Oppenheim, G. M., & Dell, G. S. 2008. Inner speech slips exhibit lexical bias, but not the phonemic similarity effect. Cognition, 106(1), 528-537.
Rebei, A., Anderson, N. D., & Dell, G. S. 2019. Learning the phonotactics of button pushing: Consolidation, retention, and syllable structure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
Reeves, L. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. 1998. Words and meaning: From primitives to complex organization. Psycholinguistics, 2, 157-226.
Sailor, K., Brooks, P. J., Bruening, P. R., Seiger-Gardner, L., & Guterman, M. 2009.
‧
Exploring the time course of semantic interference and associative priming in the picture–word interference task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(4), 789-801.
Sheng, L., McGregor, K. K., & Marian, V. 2006. Lexical–semantic organization in bilingual children: Evidence from a repeated word association task. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(3), 572-587.
Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. 1974. Structure and process in semantic
memory: A featural model for semantic decisions. Psychological review, 81(3), 214.
Tang, Marc & Wan, I-Ping. 2019. Predicting Speech Errors in Mandarin Based on Word Frequency. In Su, Qu and Zhan, Weidong (Eds.), From Minimal Contrast to Meaning Construct, Frontiers in Chinese Linguistics 9. 289-304. Springer, Peking University Press.
Team, R. C. 2018. R: A language and environment for statistical computing; 2015.
Taiwan Ministry of Education. 1994. The Ministry of Education Recompiled Mandarin Dictionary. (http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/)
Vitevitch, M. S. 2008. What can graph theory tell us about word learning and lexical retrieval?. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
Vitevitch, M. S., & Goldstein, R. 2014. Keywords in the mental lexicon. Journal of memory and language, 73, 131-147.
Wan, I. P. 2007. Mandarin speech errors into phonological patterns. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 35(1), 185-220.
Wan, I. P. & Tang, M. A corpus study of lexical speech errors in Mandarin. Manuscript.
Wan, I. P. & Ting, J. 2019. Semantic relationships in Mandarin speech errors. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics (17), 2, 33-66.
Wang, W. S., & Sun, C. 2015. The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Warren, R. E. 1974. Association, directionality, and stimulus encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102(1), 151.
Yip, M. 1980. The Tonal Phonology of Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation. MIT.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
& Education (8), 145-146.
Zhang, J. & Chen, D. 2018. An Empirical Study on Chinese College Students’ Associative Reaction to Chinese Mental Lexicon. Applied Linguistics (4), 75-84.
Zhang, P. 2010. Choice of Prompt Words and Classification of Responses in Word Association Tests: A Reexamination. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages (1), 41-45.
Zhao, C. 2012. A Review of Lexical Representation Research. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies (7), 38-44.
Zhao, Y. 2013. liu xue sheng yu mu yu zhe xin li ci hui de bi jiao yan jiu (留學生與母語 者心理詞彙的比較研究). Science & Technology Information (18), 62-63.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學