Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-z2ts4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T05:12:07.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flexible letter-position coding is unlikely to hold for morphologically rich languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2012

Jukka Hyönä  and
Raymond Bertram
Jukka Hyönä
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Turku, FI-20014 Turku, Finland hyona@utu.fi http://users.utu.fi/hyona/
Raymond Bertram
Affiliation:
Department of Teacher Education, University of Turku, FI-20014 Turku, Finland. rayber@utu.fi http://users.utu.fi/~rayber/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We agree with Frost that flexible letter-position coding is unlikely to be a universal property of word recognition across different orthographies. We argue that it is particularly unlikely in morphologically rich languages like Finnish. We also argue that dual-route models are not overly flexible and that they are well equipped to adapt to the linguistic environment at hand.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , October 2012 , pp. 290 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bertram, R., Kuperman, V., Baayen, R. H. & Hyönä, J. (2011) The hyphen as a segmentation cue in triconstituent compound processing: It's getting better all the time. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 52:530–44.Google Scholar
Bertram, R., Pollatsek, A. & Hyönä, J. (2004) Morphological parsing and the use of segmentation cues in reading Finnish compounds. Journal of Memory and Language 51:325–45.Google Scholar
Christianson, K., Johnson, R. L. & Rayner, K. I. (2005) Letter transpositions within and across morphemes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31:1327–39.Google ScholarPubMed
Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M. & Carreiras, M. (2007) Do transposed-letter similarity effects occur at a morpheme level? Evidence for morpho-orthographic decomposition. Cognition 105(3):691–703.Google Scholar
Grainger, J. & Ziegler, J. (2011) A dual-route approach to orthographic processing. Frontiers in Psychology 2:54. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00054. (Web journal, online publication).Google Scholar
Rueckl, J. G. & Rimzhim, A. (2011) On the interaction of letter transpositions and morphemic boundaries. Language and Cognitive Processes 26:482–508.Google Scholar