Summary Details
| Query: |
summary of responses to psycholinguistics query
|
|
| Author: | DAVID WHARTON | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
Psycholinguistics
|
|
| Summary: |
In LINGUIST 8.981, I posted the following query: >If an ambiguous word has a strongly dominant sense, >is that sense most likely to be the one actually selected in neutral >contexts? Of course the intuitive answer seems obivously to be "yes," >but I haven't found any formal studies affirming this, as most studies >do not explicitly relate dominance bias or strength of activation with >the processes of sense selection. >Two more general questions: have the findings of Tabossi >pretty much spelled an end to a purely modularist view of lexial >processing? >And finally, to what extent are connectionist explanations of lexical >processing like Kawamoto's (see below) gaining credence among >psycholinguists? The sole respondent was James Fidelholtz, who, although he couldn't directly address my questions, pointed out a very useful compilation of sense-frequencies for common English words: Michael West, _A general service list of English words_ (1953), Longman. Thanks, Dave =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- David Wharton Department of Classical Studies 237 McIver Building The University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27412-5001 email: whartond@uncg.edu tel. (910)334-5214 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- |
|
| LL Issue: | 8.1041 | |
| Date Posted: | 12-Jul-1997 | |
| Original Query: | Read original query | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums main page
|
||
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
|
Report Broken Link
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents. |
|
