The Role of Meaning Frequency in Processing Lexically Ambiguous Words

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara C. Sereno ◽  
Cameron C. Brewer
2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Nievas ◽  
Fernando Justicia ◽  
José J. Cañas ◽  
M. Teresa Bajo

Four experiments examined the role of meaning frequency (dominance) and associative strength (measured by associative norms) in the processing of ambiguous words in isolation. Participants made lexical decisions to targets words that were associates of the more frequent (dominant) or less frequent (subordinate) meaning of a homograph prime. The first two experiments investigated the role of associative strength at long SOAs (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony) (750 ms.), showing that meaning is facilitated by the targets' associative strength and not by their dominance. The last two experiments traced the role associative strength at short SOAs (250 ms), showing that the manipulation of the associative strength has no effect in the semantic priming. The conclusions are: on the one hand, semantic priming for homographs is due to associative strength manipulations at long SOAs. On the other hand, the manipulation of the associative strength has no effect when automatic processes (short SOAs) are engaged for homographs.


Author(s):  
Helen H. Shen

Abstract This study investigated factors associated with and strategies used by advanced Chinese L2 learners in accessing the meanings of commonly used polysemous words (lexically ambiguous words) in sentential reading. The participants included 26 learners of Chinese from a Midwest university in the US. The results showed that word frequency, meaning frequency of polysemous words, and learners’ knowledge of polysemous words affected successful lexical access in sentential contexts. Learners mainly used five types of strategies to solve lexical ambiguity problems, of which three were more frequently used: contextual cues, the intra-word analysis method, and the dominant meaning cue. Contextual cues were the most frequently used strategy.


In Сhapter 2 we describe how verbal information is processed at different linguistic levels, from recognizing single letters to reading and comprehension of coherent texts. We present the results of several experimental studies on reading in Russian which has specific features like Cyrillic script, rich morphology and flexible word order. First, we show some features of Cyrillic letters recognition of different font types in the experiment with invisible boundary. Our results reveal that the font type affects the recognition of crowed letters (letters in Courier New were harder to identify than the ones in Georgia), while recognition efficiency of isolat- ed letters remains at the same level. Since crowded letters imitate real reading, we claim that Georgia is more readable font than Courier New. Second, we describe the lexical, syntactic and referential ambiguity processing emphasizing the role of semantic context. Thus, we show that the processing of ambiguous words does not depend on the type of their meaning (literal or non-literal) …, and the referential ambiguity advantage effect. Third, we compare the process- ing of literal and non-literal expressions in Russian. We try to tease apart different approaches to idioms as well as to give a better explanation of what units may be stored in the mental lex- icon and how syntactic processing may proceed. Finally, we demonstrate the influence of the text type, functional style and reading skills on text processing. We show that the text type is among the readability categories and it influences the effect of reading perspective: eye-track- ing parameters of reading a static text (descriptive sentences) and a dynamic text (sequence of events following swiftly on one another) differ a lot.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Restu Resmiyati

The majority of words in the English language does not correspond to a single meaning, but rather correspond to two or more unrelated meanings (i.e., are homonymy) or multiple related senses (i.e., are polysemy). It has been proposed that the different types of “semantically-ambiguous words” (i.e., words with more than one meaning) are processed and represented differently in the human mind. Several review papers and books have been written on the subject of semantic ambiguity have investigated the role of the semantic similarity between the multiple meanings of ambiguous words on processing and representation. This paper attempts to identify salient traits of distinctions between the polysemy and the homonymy words in a language and how they form ambiguity. Key words: lexical ambiguity, polysemy, homonymy


1992 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 296-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara C Sereno ◽  
Jeremy M Pacht ◽  
Keith Rayner

Subjects read sentences containing lexically ambiguous words while their eye movements were monitored Biased ambiguous words (those that have one highly dominant sense) were used in sentences containing a prior context that instantiated their subordinate sense Control words were matched in frequency both to the dominant and to the subordinate meaning of the ambiguous word (high- and low-frequency controls) Subjects fixated longer on both the ambiguous word and the low-frequency control than on the high-frequency control When the target was ambiguous, however, the duration of posttarget fixations was longer and the likelihood of making a regression to the target was greater than when the target was an unambiguous control The results are discussed in relation to current models of lexical ambiguity resolution


1973 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 368-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Marcel ◽  
R. Gordon Steel

This study is concerned with the recognition and recall of semantically ambiguous words (homographs) presented in a semantic context. Changing the semantic context lowered test scores relative to test conditions both without context and with the same semantic context. This effect was found to obtain in both recognition and recall. The results are discussed in terms of the role of retrieval in recognition and recall.


2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
TAMAR DEGANI ◽  
NATASHA TOKOWICZ

Relatively little is known about the role of ambiguity in adult second-language learning. In this study, native English speakers learned Dutch–English translation pairs that either mapped in a one-to-one fashion (unambiguous items) in that a Dutch word uniquely corresponded to one English word, or mapped in a one-to-many fashion (ambiguous items), with two Dutch translations corresponding to a single English word. These two Dutch translations could function as exact synonyms, corresponding to a single meaning, or could correspond to different meanings of an ambiguous English word (e.g., wisselgeld denotes the monetary meaning of the word change, and verandering denotes alteration). Several immediate and delayed tests revealed that such translation ambiguity creates a challenge for learners. Furthermore, words with multiple translations corresponding to the same meaning are more difficult to learn than words with multiple translations corresponding to multiple meanings, suggesting that a one-to-many mapping underlies this ambiguity disadvantage.


2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (8) ◽  
pp. 1173-1188
Author(s):  
Julia Edeleva ◽  
Anna Chrabaszcz ◽  
Valeriia Demareva

We report results from a self-paced silent-reading study and a self-paced reading-aloud study examining ambiguous forms (heteronyms) of Russian animate and inanimate nouns which are differentiated in speech through word stress, for example, uCHItelja.TEACHER.GEN/ACC.SG and uchiteLJA.TEACHERS.NOM.PL.1 During reading, the absence of the auditory cue (word stress) to word identification results in morphologically ambiguous forms since both words have the same inflectional marking, -ja. Because word inflection is a reliable cue to syntactic role assignment, the ambiguity affects the level of morphology and of syntactic structure. However, word order constraints and frequency advantage of the GEN over both the NOM and the ACC noun forms with the - a/-ja inflection should pre-empt two different syntactic parses (OVS vs. SVO) when the heteronym is sentence-initial. We inquired into whether the parser is aware of the multi-level ambiguity and whether selected conflicting cues (case, word order, animacy) can prime parallel access to several structural parses. We found that animate and inanimate nouns patterned differently. The difference was consistent across the experiments. Against the backdrop of classical sentence processing dichotomies, the emergent pattern fits with the serial interactive or the parallel modular parser hypothesis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document