Distinct orthography boosts morphophonological discrimination: Vowel raising in Bengali verb inflections

Althaus, Nadja ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4888-1508, Kotzor, Sandra, Schuster, Swetlana and Lahiri, Aditi (2022) Distinct orthography boosts morphophonological discrimination: Vowel raising in Bengali verb inflections. Cognition, 222. ISSN 0010-0277

[thumbnail of 1-s2.0-S0010027721003863-main]
PDF (1-s2.0-S0010027721003863-main) - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (2MB) | Preview


This study is concerned with how vowel alternation, in combination with and without orthographic reflection of the vowel change, affects lexical access and the discrimination of morphologically related forms. Bengali inflected verb forms provide an ideal test case, since present tense verb forms undergo phonologically conditioned, predictable vowel raising. The mid-to-high alternations, but not the low-to-mid ones, are represented in the orthography. This results in three different cases: items with no change (NoDiff), items with a phonological change not represented in the orthography (PronDiff) and items for which both phonology and orthography change (OrthPronDiff). To determine whether these three cases differ in terms of lexical access and discrimination, we conducted two experiments. Experiment 1 was a cross-modal lexical decision task with auditory primes (1 st PERSON and 3 rd PERSON forms, e.g. [lek he] or [lik hi]) and visual targets (verbal noun; e.g. [lek ha]). Experiment 2 uses eye tracking in a fragment completion task, in which auditory fragments (first syllable of 1 st or 3 rd PERSON form, e.g. [le-] from [lek he]) were to be matched to one of two visual targets (full 1 st and 3 rd PERSON forms, [lek he] vs. [lik hi] in Bengali script). While the lexical decision task, a global measure of lexical access, did not show a difference between the cases, the eye-tracking experiment revealed effects of both phonology and orthography. Discrimination accuracy in the OrthPronDiff condition (vowel alternation represented in the orthography) was high. In the PronDiff condition, where phonologically differing forms are represented by the same graphemes, manual responses were at chance, although eye movements revealed that match and non-match were discriminated. Thus, our results indicate that phonological alternations which are not represented in spelling are difficult to process, whereas having orthographically distinct forms boosts discrimination performance, implying orthographically influenced mental phonological representations.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Funding Information: This work was supported by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme [Grant agreement number: 695481 PI Aditi Lahiri].
Uncontrolled Keywords: phonology,morphology,orthography,priming,eye tracking,lexical access,morphology,phonology,priming,orthography,eye tracking,lexical access,experimental and cognitive psychology,developmental and educational psychology,cognitive neuroscience,language and linguistics,linguistics and language ,/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/3200/3205
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Social Sciences > School of Psychology
UEA Research Groups: Faculty of Social Sciences > Research Groups > Developmental Science
Related URLs:
Depositing User: LivePure Connector
Date Deposited: 07 Feb 2022 11:30
Last Modified: 25 Oct 2022 00:12
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/83321
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104963


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item