Time course of the integration of the morpho-semantics and the meaning of two-character Chinese compound words

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.01207

Abstract

Abstract:

Previous studies have shown that morpho-semantic information can be automatically activated and influence word meaning access. However, the time course underlying the morpho-semantic activation and subsequent integration is unclear. In particular, an important issue is to clarify how morpho-semantic information involves in word semantic integration processing. The current event-related potential (ERP) study examined the time course of morpho-semantic information of the first and the second character that participated in whole-word semantic integration. We selected three types of two-character words: transparent compound words (e.g., 炽热, hot) having similar meanings with their two characters (both 炽 and 热 mean hot), opaque words (e.g., 风流, dissolute) having a different meaning to either the first (风, wind) or the second character (流, flow) and monomorphemic words (e.g., 伶俐, clever) having two characters that are not two independent morphemes. During the first character processing, the result found a morphological effect in the early (300~400 ms) and the late (460~700 ms) time window, showing more negative amplitude for two types of compound words than monomorphemic words. Whereas during the second character processing, the result found a significant semantic transparency effect at the early stage (260~420 ms), showing more negative-going waveform for the opaque words than transparent ones, and an inversed morphological effect at the late stage (480~700 ms) showing that two types of compound words evoked more positive amplitude than monomorphemic words. The results suggested that the morpheme was an independent unit represented in the mental lexicon and automatically activated at an early processing stage. Its meaning can facilitate the access of the related word meaning or inhibit the processing of the unrelated word meaning.

Key words: semantic integration, compound word, semantic transparency, ERP

CAI Wenqi, ZHANG Xiangyang, WANG Xiaojuan, YANG Jianfeng. (2023). Time course of the integration of the morpho-semantics and the meaning of two-character Chinese compound words. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(8), 1207-1219.

Figures/Tables 9

References 63

[1]	Bai C., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Wang L. M., Hung Y., C, Schlesewsky M., & Burkhardt P. (2008). Semantic composition engenders an N400: Evidence from Chinese compounds. Neuroreport, 19(6), 695-699. doi: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e3282fc1eb7 pmid: 18382290
[2]	Bemis D. K., & Pylkkänen L. (2011). Simple composition: A magnetoencephalography investigation into the comprehension of minimal linguistic phrases. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(8), 2801-2814. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5003-10.2011 pmid: 21414902
[3]	Beyersmann E., Iakimova G., Ziegler J. C., & Colé P. (2014). Semantic processing during morphological priming: An ERP study. Brain Research, 1579, 45-55. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.07.010 pmid: 25020124
[4]	Binder J. R., Desai R. H., Graves W. W., & Conant L. L. (2009). Where is the semantic system? a critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cerebral Cortex, 19(12), 2767-2796. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhp055 URL
[5]	Boylan C., Trueswell J. C., & Thompson-Schill S. L. (2017). Relational vs. attributive interpretation of nominal compounds differentially engages angular gyrus and anterior temporal lobe. Brain and Language, 169, 8-21. doi: S0093-934X(15)30147-4 pmid: 28236762
[6]	Brooks T. L., & Cid de Garcia D. (2015). Evidence for morphological composition in compound words using MEG. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 215. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00215 pmid: 25972798
[7]	Cavalli E., Colé P., Badier J.-M., Zielinski C., Chanoine V., & Ziegler J. C. (2016). Spatiotemporal dynamics of morphological processing in visual word recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(8), 1228-1242. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00959 pmid: 27027543
[8]	Chinese Linguistic Data Consortium. (2003). 现代汉语通用词表[Chinese lexicon] (CLDC-LAC 2003-001). Beijing, China: Tsinghua University, State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Technology and Systems, and Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Automation.
[9]	Coch D., Bares J., & Landers A. (2012). ERPs and morphological processing: The N400 and semantic composition. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(2), 355-370.
[10]	Cohen J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 pmid: 19565683
[11]	El-Bialy R., Gagné C. L., & Spalding T. L. (2013). Processing of English compounds is sensitive to the constituents’ semantic transparency. The Mental Lexicon, 8(1), 75-95. doi: 10.1075/ml URL
[12]	El Yagoubi R., Chiarelli V., Mondini S., Perrone G., Danieli M., & Semenza C. (2008). Neural correlates of Italian nominal compounds and potential impact of headedness effect: An ERP study. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25(4), 559-581. doi: 10.1080/02643290801900941 pmid: 19086202
[13]	Faul F., Erdfelder E., Buchner A., & Lang A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods*, 41(4), 1149-1160. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 pmid: 19897823
[14]	Flick G., Oseki Y., Kaczmarek A. R., Al Kaabi M., Marantz A., & Pylkkänen L. (2018). Building words and phrases in the left temporal lobe. Cortex, 106, 213-236 doi: S0010-9452(18)30190-4 pmid: 30007863
[15]	Fiorentino R., Naito-Billen Y., Bost J., & Fund-Reznicek E. (2014). Electrophysiological evidence for the morpheme-based combinatoric processing of English compounds. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31(1-2), 123-146. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2013.855633 pmid: 24279696
[16]	Fiorentino R., & Poeppel D. (2007). Processing of compound words: An MEG study. Brain and Language, 103(1), 18-19. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2007.07.009 URL
[17]	Forgács B., Bohrn I., Baudewig J., Hofmann M. J., Pléh C., & Jacobs A. M. (2012). Neural correlates of combinatorial semantic processing of literal and figurative noun noun compound words. Neuroimage, 63(3), 1432-1442. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.07.029 pmid: 22836179
[18]	Frisson S., Niswander-Klement E., & Pollatsek A. (2008). The role of semantic transparency in the processing of English compound words. British Journal of Psychology, 99(1), 87-107. doi: 10.1348/000712607X181304 URL
[19]	Gagné C. L., & Spalding T. L. (2016). Effects of morphology and semantic transparency on typing latencies in English compound and pseudocompound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(9), 1489-1495. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000258 URL
[20]	Gao F., Wang R., Armada-da-Silva P., Wang M., Lu H., Leong C., & Yuan Z. (2022). How the brain encodes morphological constraints during Chinese word reading: An EEG-fNIRS study. Cortex, 154, 184-196. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2022.05.016 pmid: 35780754
[21]	Han Y.-J., Huang S., Lee C.-Y., Kuo W.-J., & Cheng S. (2014). The modulation of semantic transparency on the recognition memory for two-character Chinese words. Memory & Cognition, 42(8), 1315-1324. doi: 10.3758/s13421-014-0430-1 URL
[22]	Huang H. W., Lee C. Y., Tsai J. L., & Tzeng O. J. (2011). Sublexical ambiguity effect in reading Chinese disyllabic compounds. Brain and Language, 117(2), 77-87. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.01.003 URL
[23]	Hsu C.-H., Pylkkänen L., & Lee C.-Y. (2019). Effects of morphological complexity in left temporal cortex: An MEG study of reading Chinese disyllabic words. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 49, 168-177. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2018.06.004 URL
[24]	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(4), 406-430. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.07.003 URL
[25]	Kim J., Kang J., Kim J., & Nam K. (2022). Temporal dynamics of form and meaning in morphologically complex word processing: An ERP study on Korean inflected verbs. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 64, 101098. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2022.101098 URL
[26]	Kim S., & Pylkkänen L. (2019). Composition of event concepts: Evidence for distinct roles for the left and right anterior temporal lobes. Brain and Language, 188, 18-27. doi: S0093-934X(18)30133-0 pmid: 30530286
[27]	Koester D., & Schiller N. O. (2008). Morphological priming in overt language production: Electrophysiological evidence from Dutch. Neuroimage, 42(4), 1622-1630. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.06.043 pmid: 18674626
[28]	Koester D., & Schiller N. O. (2011). The functional neuroanatomy of morphology in language production. Neuroimage, 55(2), 732-741. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.044 pmid: 21109010
[29]	Kuo L., & Anderson R. C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read: A cross-language perspective. Educational Psychologist, 41, 161-180. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4103_3 URL
[30]	Kwon Y., Nam K., & Lee Y. (2012). ERP index of the morphological family size effect during word recognition. Neuropsychologia, 50(14), 3385-3391. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.041 pmid: 23036281
[31]	Lavric A., Clapp A., & Rastle K. (2007). ERP evidence of morphological analysis from orthography: A masked priming study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(5), 866-877. pmid: 17488210
[32]	Lee H.-J., Cheng S., Lee C.-Y., & Kuo W.-J. (2021). The neural basis of compound word processing revealed by varying semantic transparency and morphemic neighborhood size. Brain and Language, 221, 104985.
[33]	Leminen A., Smolka E., Duñabeitia J. A., Pliatsikas C. (2019). Morphological processing in the brain: The good (inflection), the bad (derivation) and the ugly (compounding). Cortex, 116, 4-44. doi: S0010-9452(18)30266-1 pmid: 30268324
[34]	Libben G., Gagné C. L., & Dressler W. U. (2020). The representation and processing of compounds words. In V. Pirrelli, I. Plag & W. Dressler (Eds.), Word knowledge and word usage: A cross-disciplinary guide to the mental lexicon (pp. 336-352). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
[35]	Liu P. D., & Mcbride-Chang C. (2010). Morphological processing of Chinese compounds from a grammatical view. Applied PsychoLinguistics, 31(4), 605-617. doi: 10.1017/S0142716410000159 URL
[36]	Lo J. C. M., McBride C., Ho C. S., & Maurer U. (2019). Event- related potentials during Chinese single-character and two-character word reading in children. Brain and Cognition, 136, 103589. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2019.103589 URL
[37]	Maurer U., Schulz E., Brem S., der Mark S. van, Bucher K., Martin E., & Brandeis D. (2011). The development of print tuning in children with dyslexia: Evidence from longitudinal ERP data supported by fMRI. Neuroimage, 57(3), 714-722. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.055 pmid: 21040695
[38]	Momenian M., Radman N., Rafipoor H., Barzegar M., & Weekes B. (2021). Compound words are decomposed regardless of semantic transparency and grammatical class: An fMRI study in Persian. Lingua, 259, 103120. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103120 URL
[39]	Peng D., Ding G., Wang C., Taft M., & Zhu X. (1999). The processing of Chinese reversible words——the role of morphemes in lexical access. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 31(1), 36-46.
[40]	Pollatsek A., Hyönä J., & Bertram R. (2000). The role of morphological constituents in reading Finnish compound words. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance, 26(2), 820-833.
[41]	Rastle K., Davis M. H., & New B. (2004). The broth in my brother’s brothel: Morpho-orthographic segmentation in visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(6), 1090-1098. doi: 10.3758/BF03196742 URL
[42]	Seghier M. L. (2013). The angular gyrus: Multiple functions and multiple subdivisions. Neuroscientist, 19(1), 43-61. doi: 10.1177/1073858412440596 pmid: 22547530
[43]	Taft M. (2003). Morphological representation as a correlation between form and meaning. In E. Assink & D. Sandra (Eds.), Reading complex words (pp. 113-137). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
[44]	Taft M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(4), 745-765. doi: 10.1080/02724980343000477 URL
[45]	Taft M., & Nguyen-Hoan M. (2010). A sticky stick? The locus of morphological representation in the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(2), 277-296. doi: 10.1080/01690960903043261 URL
[46]	Tsai C.-H. (1994). Effects of semantic transparency on the recognition of Chinese two-character words: Evidence for a dual-process model ( Unpublished master's thesis). National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan.
[47]	Tsang Y.-K., & Chen H.-C. (2013). Early morphological processing is sensitive to morphemic meanings: Evidence from processing ambiguous morphemes. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 223-239. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.003 URL
[48]	Tsang Y.-K., & Chen H.-C. (2014). Activation of morphemic meanings in processing opaque words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(5), 1281-1286. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0589-2 URL
[49]	Tsang Y. -K., & Zou Y. (2022). An ERP megastudy of Chinese word recognition. Psychophysiology, 59(11), e14111.
[50]	Tsang Y.-K., Zou Y., & Tse C.-Y. (2022). Semantic transparency in Chinese compound word processing: Evidence from mismatch negativity. Neuroscience, 490, 216-223. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2022.03.007 URL
[51]	Wu J., Chang J., Qiu Y., & Joseph D. (2020). The temporal process of visual word recognition of Chinese compound: Behavioral and ERP evidences based on homographic morphemes. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(2), 113-127. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00113
[52]	Wu Y., Duan R., Zhao S., & Tsang Y.-K. (2020). Processing ambiguous morphemes in Chinese compound word recognition: Behavioral and ERP evidence. Neuroscience, 446, 249-260. doi: S0306-4522(20)30511-X pmid: 32795558
[53]	Wu Y., Tsang Y.-K., Wong A. W.-K., & Chen H.-C. (2017). The processing of homographic morphemes in Chinese: An ERP study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32(1), 102-116.
[54]	Yen M.-H., Tsai J.-L., Tzeng O. J.-L., & Huang D. L. (2008). Eye movements and parafoveal word processing in reading Chinese. Memory & Cognition, 36(5), 1033-1045. doi: 10.3758/MC.36.5.1033 URL
[55]	Zhang L., & Pylkkänen L. (2015). The interplay of composition and concept specificity in the left anterior temporal lobe: An MEG study. Neuroimage, 111, 228-240. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.028 pmid: 25703829
[56]	Zhang R., ang Z., Wang X., & Yang J. (2021). N170 adaptation effect of the sub-lexical phonological and semantic processing in Chinese character reading. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(8), 807-820. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00807
[57]	Zhao S., Wu Y., Li T., & Guo Q. (2017). Morpho-semantic processing in Chinese word recognition: An ERP study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(3), 296-306. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00296
[58]	Zhao S., Wu Y., Tsang Y.-K., Sui X., & Zhu Z. (2021). Morpho-semantic analysis of ambiguous morphemes in Chinese compound word recognition: An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 157, 107862. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107862 URL
[59]	Zhou X. L., & Marslen-Wilson W. (1995). Morphological structure in the Chinese mental lexicon. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 10(6), 545-600
[60]	Zhou X. L., Marslen-Wilson W., Taft M., & Shu H. (1999). Morphology, orthography, and phonology in reading Chinese compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(5-6), 525-565. doi: 10.1080/016909699386185 URL
[61]	Ziegler J., & Pylkkänen L. (2016). Scalar adjectives and the temporal unfolding of semantic composition: An MEG investigation. Neuropsychologia, 89, 161-171. doi: S0028-3932(16)30209-3 pmid: 27297726
[62]	Zou L., Packard J. L., Xia Z., Liu Y., & Shu H. (2016). Neural correlates of morphological processing: Evidence from Chinese. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 714.
[63]	Zou L., Packard J. L., Xia Z., Liu Y., & Shu H. (2019). Morphological and whole-word semantic processing are distinct: Event related potentials evidence from spoken word recognition in Chinese. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, 133. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00133 pmid: 31057382

Properties of the experimental stimulus	Transparent compound words	Opaque compound words	Mono- morphemic words
1st character transparency	5.59(0.59)	2.58(0.64)	/
2nd character transparency	5.66(0.72)	2.76(0.75)	/
Word transparency	11.25(1.21)	5.34(0.98)	/
1st character number of radicals	2.97(1.00)	2.87(1.01)	3.23(0.82)
2nd character number of radicals	3.03(0.72)	3.00(0.98)	3.13(0.78)
Word number of radicals	6.00(1.08)	5.87(1.31)	6.37(0.96)
1st character number of strokes	9.57(2.99)	9.07(3.05)	9.70(2.26)
2nd character number of strokes	9.80(2.44)	9.70(2.84)	10.07(2.21)
Word number of strokes	19.37(3.58)	18.77(4.17)	19.77(2.82)
Word frequency	3.17(3.35)	4.66(9.43)	1.90(2.01)

Properties of the experimental stimulus	Transparent compound words	Opaque compound words	Mono- morphemic words
1st character transparency	5.59(0.59)	2.58(0.64)	/
2nd character transparency	5.66(0.72)	2.76(0.75)	/
Word transparency	11.25(1.21)	5.34(0.98)	/
1st character number of radicals	2.97(1.00)	2.87(1.01)	3.23(0.82)
2nd character number of radicals	3.03(0.72)	3.00(0.98)	3.13(0.78)
Word number of radicals	6.00(1.08)	5.87(1.31)	6.37(0.96)
1st character number of strokes	9.57(2.99)	9.07(3.05)	9.70(2.26)
2nd character number of strokes	9.80(2.44)	9.70(2.84)	10.07(2.21)
Word number of strokes	19.37(3.58)	18.77(4.17)	19.77(2.82)
Word frequency	3.17(3.35)	4.66(9.43)	1.90(2.01)

Source of variation	300~400 ms			460~700 ms
Source of variation	F	p	η²	F	p	η²
Word type (2, 62)	5.12	0.009	0.142	8.91	0.000	0.223
Region (2, 62)	0.01	0.951	0.000	5.58	0.016	0.153
Hemisphere (2, 62)	4.51	0.015	0.127	5.51	0.006	0.151
Region × Hemisphere (4, 124)	5.38	0.002	0.148	11.45	0.000	0.270
Word type × Region (4, 124)	1.80	0.154	0.055	3.13	0.036	0.092
Word type × Hemisphere (4, 124)	2.00	0.123	0.061	1.83	0.150	0.056
Word type × Region × Hemisphere (8, 248)	1.62	0.120	0.050	1.42	0.223	0.044

Source of variation	300~400 ms			460~700 ms
Source of variation	F	p	η²	F	p	η²
Word type (2, 62)	5.12	0.009	0.142	8.91	0.000	0.223
Region (2, 62)	0.01	0.951	0.000	5.58	0.016	0.153
Hemisphere (2, 62)	4.51	0.015	0.127	5.51	0.006	0.151
Region × Hemisphere (4, 124)	5.38	0.002	0.148	11.45	0.000	0.270
Word type × Region (4, 124)	1.80	0.154	0.055	3.13	0.036	0.092
Word type × Hemisphere (4, 124)	2.00	0.123	0.061	1.83	0.150	0.056
Word type × Region × Hemisphere (8, 248)	1.62	0.120	0.050	1.42	0.223	0.044

Main effect	Post hoc analysis	300~400 ms			460~700 ms
Main effect	Post hoc analysis	t	p	Cohen’s d	t	p	Cohen’s d
Region	Anterior - Posterior	/	/	/	0.30	1.000	0.053
	Anterior - Central	/	/	/	-4.02	0.001	-0.726
	Posterior - Central	/	/	/	-3.26	0.008	-0.579
Hemisphere	Left - Right	-2.57	0.046	-0.454	-2.22	0.102	-0.392
	Left - Midline	0.12	1.000	0.022	-3.31	0.007	-0.604
	Midline - Right	-2.79	0.027	-0.523	0.83	1.000	0.150