Affiliation:
1. English, Université Laval
2. St. Mary’s University
Abstract
Categorical approaches to lexical stress typically assume that words have either regular or irregular stress, and imply that only the latter needs to be stored in the lexicon, while the former can be derived by rule. In this paper, we compare these two groups of words in a lexical decision task in Portuguese to examine whether the dichotomy in question affects lexical retrieval latencies in native speakers, which could indirectly reveal different processing patterns. Our results show no statistically credible effect of stress regularity on reaction times, even when lexical frequency, neighborhood density, and phonotactic probability are taken into consideration. The lack of an effect is consistent with a probabilistic approach to stress, not with a categorical (traditional) approach where syllables are either light or heavy and stress is either regular or irregular. We show that the posterior distribution of credible effect sizes of regularity is almost entirely within the region of practical equivalence, which provides strong evidence that no effect of regularity exists in the lexical decision data modelled. Frequency and phonotactic probability, in contrast, showed statistically credible effects given the experimental data modelled, which is consistent with the literature.
Publisher
Open Library of the Humanities
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference66 articles.
1. Rules vs. Analogy in English Past Tenses: A Computational/Experimental Study;Albright, A.Hayes, B.;Cognition,2003
2. Lexical stress representation in spoken word recognition;Andrikopoulou, A.Protopapas, A.Arvaniti, A.;Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,2021
3. The processing of lexical stress during visual word recognition: Typicality effects and orthographic correlates;Arciuli, J.Cupples, L.;Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,2006
4. Baayen, R. H. (2007). Storage and computation in the mental lexicon. In G. Jarema & G. Libben (Eds.), The mental lexicon: core perspectives (pp. 81–104). Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_60468_2/component/file_60469/content
5. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal;Barr, D.Levy, R.Scheepers, C.Tily, H.;Journal of Memory and Language,2013