바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.31 No.1

Citation Share

The Influence of Word Type and Compositionality on the Word Length Effect in Korean

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2019, v.31 no.1, pp.39-52
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2019.31.1.003


& (2019). The Influence of Word Type and Compositionality on the Word Length Effect in Korean. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 31(1), 39-52, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2019.31.1.003

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to examine the facilitatory effect of word length (the number of syllables in a word), a new phenomenon showing that bisyllabic words are recognized faster than monosyllabic words. In Experiment 1, three types of native Korean words were compared: monosyllabic words, bisyllabic simplex words, and bisyllabic compounds. The results showed that lexical decision was faster for bisyllabic words than monosyllabic words, confirming the facilitatory effect of word length in Korean. The word length effect was bigger for high frequency words than low frequency words. In Experiment 2 using Hanja words, the facilitatory word length effect was replicated, and the interaction of word length and frequency was found to be significant. The results of Experiment 1 and 2 were not consistent with the serial-parallel processing explanation and the ideal length hypothesis. An alternative explanation was attempted based on the properties of native Korean and Hanja words.

keywords
word recognition, word length effect, compound word, Hanja word, native word, 단어재인, 단어길이효과, 합성어, 한자어, 고유어

Reference

1.

Adelman, J. S., Marquis, S. J., & Sabatos-DeVito, M. G. (2010). Letters in words are read simultaneously, not in left-to-right sequence. Psychological Science, 21, 1799-1801.

2.

Ans, B., Carbonnel, S., & Valdois, S. (1998). A connectionist multiple-trace memory model for polysyllabic word reading. Psychological Review, 105, 678-723.

3.

Bae, S., Park, K., Lee, H., & Yi, K. (2016). The mono-syllabic word inferiority effect within Korean word recognition. Journal of Linguistic Science, 77, 109-125.

4.

Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllablewords. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 133, 283-316.

5.

Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D. L., Simpson, G. B., & Treiman, R. (2007). The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445-459.

6.

Barton, J. J. S., Hanif, H. M., Bjornstrom, L. E., & Hills, C. (2014). The word-length effect in reading: A review. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31, 378-412.

7.

Carreiras, M., Armstrong, B. C., Perea, M., Frost, R. (2014). The what, when, where, and how of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Science, 18, 90-98.

8.

Choi, Y. (1986). Umjelsouka Hankul tan'ejaiyin pan'ungsikan'ei michinun yenghyang (Master’s thesis). Pusan National University, Busan, Korea.

9.

Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, T., & Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention & Performance Ⅳ. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

10.

Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256.

11.

Ferrand, L., & New, B. (2003). Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychologica, 113, 167-183.

12.

Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, 35, 116-124.

13.

Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 256-281.

14.

Hudson, P. T. W., & Bergman, M. W. (1985). Lexical knowledge in word recognition: word length in naming and lexical decision tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 46-58.

15.

Ji, H., Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2011). Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 406-430.

16.

Jin, R., Lee, H., & Choi. W. (2018). Are they real neighbors? Null effects of syllabic neighbors in Korean word recognition. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 30, 211-223.

17.

Juphard, A., Carbonnel, S, & Valdois, S. (2004). Length effect in reading and lexical decision: Evidence from skilled readers and a developmental dyslexic participant. Brain and Cognition, 55, 332-340.

18.

Kwon, Y. (2012). The dissociation of syllabic token and type frequency effect in lexical decision task. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 24, 315-328.

19.

Kwon, Y., Cho, H., Kim, C., & Nam, K. (2006). The neighborhood effect in Korean visual word recognition. The Korean Society of Phonetic Sciences and Speech Technology, 60, 29-45.

20.

Kwon, Y., Lee, C., Lee, K., & Nam, K. (2011). The inhibitory effect of phonological syllables, rather than orthographic syllables, as evidenced in Korean lexical decision tasks. Psychologia, 54, 1-14.

21.

Lee, C. H. (1999). A locus of the word-length effect on word recognition. Reading Psychology, 20, 129-150.

22.

Lee, C. H. (2001). Absence of syllable effects: Multisyllabic words are easier than monosyllabic words. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 93, 73-77.

23.

Lee, H., & Lim, Y.-K. (2005). Word frequency effects in normal and visually-degraded conditions in Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Educational Psychology, 19, 821-834.

24.

Lee, S., & Lee, Y. (2018). The effect of the morphological characteristics on Korean spoken word recognition:Comparing simple words and compound words. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 30, 35-51.

25.

Ma, B., Wang, X., & Li D. (2016). The processing of visual and phonological configurations of chinese one- and two-character words in a priming task of semantic categorization. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1918. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01918. eCollection 2015.

26.

Nam, K., Han, J. H., Baik, Y., & Koo, M. (2012). Effects of syllable frequency in visually recognizing Korean monosyllabic words. Journal of Linguistics Science, 63, 1-20.

27.

Nam, K., Seo, K., Choi, K., Lee, K., Kim, T., & Lee, M. (1997). Word length effect on Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 1-18.

28.

National Institute of the Korean Language (2005). A survey of frequency in use of the Korean language. Seoul, Korea:National Institute of the Korean Language.

29.

New, B., Ferrand, L., Pallier, C., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Reexamining word length effects in visual word recognition:New evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 13.1:45-52.

30.

Noh, M.-H. (2008). The relatedness between constituents and meaning of Sino-Korean. Journal of Korean Linguistics, 51, 89-113.

31.

Noh, M.-H. (2014). Sino-Korean word-formation and function unit. Korean Semantics, 43, 159-185.

32.

Norris, D. (2013). Models of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 517-524.

33.

Oh, J.-H., Choi, M.-G., Yi, H.-W., & Lee, C. H. (2007). The effects of morphemes on Korean word recognition: revealed on the frequency and length effects. In The proceedings of third international conference on natural computation (ICNC 2007).

34.

Park, K. (1993). Mental code involved in Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 5, 40-55.

35.

Park, T. (2003). Subjective frequency estimates of Korean words and frequency effect on word recognition. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 15, 349-366.

36.

Perea, M. (2015). Neighborhood effects in visual word recognition and reading. In A. Pollatsek & R. Treiman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of reading (pp. 76-87). New York: Oxford University Press.

37.

Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (1998). Effects of syllable frequency and syllable neighborhood frequency in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 134-144.

38.

Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(7-8), 942-971.

39.

Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523-568.

40.

Shaffer, J. P. (1995). Multiple hypothesis testing. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 561-584.

41.

Snell, J., Grainger, J., & Declercket, M. (2018). A word on words in words: how do embedded words affect reading?. Journal of Cognition, 1, 1-12.

42.

Taft, M., Xu, J., & Li, S. (2017). Letter coding in visual word recognition: The impact of embedded words. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 14-25.

43.

Yi, K. (2003). The effects of word types on word recognition in korean. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 15, 479-498.

44.

Yi, K., Koo, M,, Nam, K., Park, K., Park, T., Bae, S., Lee, C. H., Lee, H.-W., Cho, J.-R. (2017). The Korean Lexicon Project: A Lexical Decision Study on 30,930 Korean Words and Nonwords. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 29, 395-410.

45.

Yi, K., & Yi, I. (1999). Morphological processing in Korean word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 11, 77-91.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy