Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-45ctf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-20T12:27:44.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing early-stage L2 processing of derived and inflected words: a conceptual replication of Jacob et al. (2018) with Chinese learners of L2 English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 October 2025

Zhaohong Wu Open the ORCID record for Zhaohong Wu [Opens in a new window]  and
Melinda Fricke
Zhaohong Wu*
Affiliation:
School of English and International Studies, Beijing Foreign Studies University , Beijing, China
Melinda Fricke
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA, USA
*
Corresponding author: Zhaohong Wu; Email: wuzhaohong@bfsu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study presents a conceptual replication of Jacob et al.’s (2018) comparison of L2 early-stage processing of derived vs. inflected words. Previous studies on this issue focused predominantly on L2 learners from morphologically complex, alphabetic L1s, and generally showed L2 decompositional processing of derived but not inflected words. This replication study examined whether the previous claim for a qualitative difference in L2 early-stage processing of derived and inflected words could generalize to L2 English learners from a morphologically isolating, logographic L1, i.e., Chinese learners of L2 English. Results from a masked priming lexical decision task showed qualitatively the same magnitude of priming in the derivational, inflectional, and form control conditions for Chinese learners of English, suggesting reliance on surface form information in the early-stage processing of both derived and inflected words. Results of the current study add to the literature on L2 early-stage processing of derived vs. inflected words.

Keywords

derivational processinginflectional processingL1 effectsmasked primingmorphological processing

Information

Type
Replication Study
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 47 , Issue 5 , December 2025 , pp. 1488 - 1506
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open data Open materials
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Altarriba, J., & Mathis, K. M. (1997). Conceptual and lexical development in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 36(4), 550–568. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, S. R. (1982). Where’s morphology? Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 571–612.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. (1976). Word formation in generative grammar. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, M. (1994). Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Hendrix, P., & Ramscar, M. (2013). Sidestepping the combinatorial explosion: An explanation of n-gram frequency effects based on naive discriminative learning. Language and Speech, 56(3), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830913484896CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Durdevic, D. F., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 118(3), 438–481. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023851CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Cortese, M. J., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D.L., Simpson, G. B., & Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193014CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bar-On, A., & Ravid, D. (2011). Morphological analysis in learning to read pseudowords in Hebrew. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(3), 553–581. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271641100021XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basnight-Brown, D. M., Chen, L., Hua, S., Kostic, A., & Feldman, L. B. (2007). Monolingual and bilingual recognition of regular and irregular English verbs: Sensitivity to form similarity varies with first language experience. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.03.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertram, R., Laine, M., Baayen, R. H., Schreuder, R., & Hyönä, J. (2000). Affixal Homonymy triggers full-form storage, even with inflected words, even in a morphologically rich language. Cognition, 74(2), B13–B25. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00068-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyersmann, E., Ziegler, J., Castles, A., Coltheart, M., Kezilas, Y., & Grainger, J. (2016). Morpho-orthographic segmentation without semantics. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 533–539. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0927-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blevins, J. P. (2006). English inflection and derivation. In Aarts, B. & McMahon, A. (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics (pp. 507–536). Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blevins, J. P. (2016). Word and paradigm morphology. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. E. (2006). Inflection and derivation. In Brown, K. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics (2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 654–661). Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. E. (2012). The grammar of words. An introduction to linguistic morphology (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Box, G. E. P., & Cox, D. R. (1964). An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) , 26, 211–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., New, B., & Keuleers, E. (2012). Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 991–997. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0190-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casalis, S., Quémart, P., & Duncan, L. G. (2015). How language affects children’s use of derivational morphology in visual word and pseudoword processing: evidence from a cross-language study. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00452CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ciaccio, L. A., & Jacob, G. (2019). Native speakers like affixes, L2 speakers like letters? An overt visual priming study investigating the role of orthography in L2 morphological processing. PLoS One, 14(12), e0226482. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226482CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ciaccio, L. A., & Veríssimo, J. (2022). Investigating variability in morphological processing with Bayesian distributional models. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(6), 2264–2274. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-022-02109-wCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H., Felser, C., Neubauer, K., Sato, M., & Silva, R. (2010). Morphological structure in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning, 60(1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00550.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Neubauer, K. (2010). Morphology, frequency, and the processing of derived words in native and non-native speakers. Lingua, 120(11), 2627–2637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.06.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, C. E., & Tremblay, A. (2015). Morphological decomposition in native and non-native French speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(03), 524–542. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728914000200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M. H., & Rastle, K. (2010). Form and meaning in early morphological processing: Comment on Feldman, O’Connor, and Moscoso del Prado Martin (2009). Psychon Bull Rev, 17(5), 749–755. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.5.749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diependaele, K., Duñabeitia, J. A., Morris, J., & Keuleers, E. (2011). Fast morphological effects in first and second language word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(4), 344–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diependaele, K., Sandra, D., & Grainger, J. (2009). Semantic transparency and masked morphological priming: the case of prefixed words. Memory & Cognition, 37(6), 895–908. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.6.895CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drews, E., & Zwitserlood, P. (1995). Morphological and orthographic similarity in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(5), 1098–1116. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.21.5.1098Google ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B. (1994). Beyond orthography and phonology: Differences between inflections and derivations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(4), 442–470. http://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Barac-Cikoja, D., & Kostić, A. (2002). Semantic aspects of morphological processing: Transparency effects in Serbian. Memory & Cognition, 30(4), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194964CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Basnight-Brown, D. M., Durdević, D. i. F., & Pastizzo, M. J. (2010). Morphological facilitation for regular and irregular verb formations in native and non-native speakers: Little evidence for two distinct mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(02), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728909990459CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Gvozdenovic, V., O’Connor, P. A., & Martín, F. M. d. P. (2012). Semantic similarity influences early morphological priming in Serbian: A challenge to form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 668–676. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0250-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, L. B., & Milin, P. (2018). Psycholinguistic studies of word morphology and their implications for models of the mental lexicon and lexical processing. In Berthiaume, R., Daigle, D. & Desrochers, A. (Eds.), Morphological Processing and Literacy Development: Current Issues and Research (pp.16–47). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., Milin, P., Cho, K. W., Moscoso del Prado Martín, F., & O’Connor, P. A. (2015). Must analysis of meaning follow analysis of form? A time course analysis. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 111. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & Del Prado Martin, F. M. (2009). Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: a violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 684–691. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.4.684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, L. B., & Prostko, B. (2002). Graded aspects of morphological processing: Task and processing time. Brain and Language, 81(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2503CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foote, R., Qasem, M., & Trentman, E. (2020). Morphological decomposition in L2 Arabic: A masked priming study. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 49(2), 291–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09688-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forster, K. I. (1998). The pros and cons of masked priming. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(2), 203–233. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023202116609CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gimenes, M., Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2016). The processing of singular and plural nouns in English, French, and Dutch: New insights from megastudies. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 316–324. http://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000074CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gu, L. (2024). The processing of English prefixed and suffixed words by Chinese-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 28(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069221137454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyer, V., & Clahsen, H. (2015). Late bilinguals see a scan in scanner AND in scandal: dissecting formal overlap from morphological priming in the processing of derived words. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(03), 543–550. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyer, V., & Kornishova, D. (2018). Semantic transparency affects morphological priming … eventually. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove), 71(5), 1112–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1310915CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jacob, G. (2015). The L2 decomposition of transparent derived verbs - Is it “morphological”? A commentary on De Grauwe, Lemhöfer, Willems, & Schriefers (2014). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, G. (2018). Morphological priming in bilingualism research. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(3), 443–447. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, G., Heyer, V., & Veríssimo, J. (2018). Aiming at the same target: A masked priming study directly comparing derivation and inflection in the second language. International Journal of Bilingualism, 22(6), 619–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916688333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, G., & Kırkıcı, B. (2016). The processing of morphologically complex words in a specific speaker group. The Mental Lexicon, 11(2), 308–328. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.11.2.06jacCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Wu, X. (2022). Orthographic priming in second-language visual word recognition. Language Learning, 72(3), 625–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Zhang, J. (2021). Form prominence in the L2 lexicon: Further evidence from word association. Second Language Research, 37(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319827053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In Frost, R. & Katz, L. (Eds.), Advances in Psychology (Vol. 94, pp. 67–84). North-Holland.Google Scholar
Kida, S., Barcroft, J., & Sommers, M. (2022). Word learning and lexicalization in a second language: Evidence from the Prime lexicality effect in masked form priming. Mem Cognit, 50(7), 1414–1431. doi:10.3758/s13421-022-01274-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kırkıcı, B., & Clahsen, H. (2013). Inflection and derivation in native and non-native language processing: Masked priming experiments on Turkish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(04), 776–791. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728912000648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuperman, V., Schreuder, R., Bertram, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2009). Reading polymorphemic Dutch compounds: Toward a multiple route model of lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3), 876–895. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013484Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P., & Christensen, R. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. http://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtonen, M., & Laine, M. (2003). How word frequency affects morphological processing in monolinguals and bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(3), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728903001147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtonen, M., Niska, H., Wande, E., Niemi, J., & Laine, M. (2006). Recognition of inflected words in a morphologically limited language: Frequency effects in monolinguals and bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35(2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-005-9008-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods (On-line), 44(2), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, J., & Taft, M. (2020). The processing of English prefixed words by Chinese-English bilinguals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J., Taft, M., & Xu, J. (2017). The processing of English derived words by Chinese-English bilinguals. Language Learning, 67(4), 858–884. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, M., Jiang, N., & Gor, K. (2017). L1 and L2 processing of compound words: Evidence from masked priming experiments in English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 384–402. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longtin, C.-M., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. A. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(3), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960244000036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty: Replication in the education sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 304–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., Waksler, R., & Older, L. (1994). Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K. (2023). How and why to conduct a replication study. In Mackey, A. & Gass, S. (Eds.), Current approaches in second language acquisition research: A practical guide (pp. 334–351). Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milin, P., Smolka, E., & Feldman, L. B. (2017). Models of lexical access and morphological processing. In Fernández, E.M. & Cairns, H.S. (Eds.), The handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 240–268). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mousikou, P., Beyersmann, E., Ktori, M., Javourey-Drevet, L., Crepaldi, D., Ziegler, J. C., Grainger, J., & Schroeder, S. (2020). Orthographic consistency influences morphological processing in reading aloud: Evidence from a cross-linguistic study. Developmental Science, 23(6), e12952. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12952CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perlmutter, D. (1988). The split-morphology hypothesis: evidence from Yiddish. In Hammond, M. & Noonan, M. (Eds.), Theoretical morphology: Approaches in modern linguistics (pp. 79–100). Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. and Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Science, 6(11), 456–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01990-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porte, G., & McManus, K. (2019). Doing replication research in applied linguistics (1st ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar
Portin, M., Lehtonen, M., Harrer, G., Wande, E., Niemi, J., & Laine, M. (2008). L1 effects on the processing of inflected nouns in L2. Acta Psychologica, 128(3), 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.07.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Psychology Software Tools, Inc. [E-Prime 3.0]. (2016) Retrieved from http://www.pstnet.comGoogle Scholar
Qu, Q., Cui, Z., & Damian, M. F. (2018). Orthographic effects in second-language spoken-word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(8), 1325–1332. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000520Google ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2008). Morphological decomposition based on the analysis of orthography. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(7–8), 942–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802069730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K., Davis, M. H., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (2000). Morphological and semantic effects in visual word recognition: A time-course study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(4), 507–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raveh, M. (2002). The contribution of frequency and semantic similarity to morphological processing. Brain and Language, 81(1), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2001.2527CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raveh, M., & Rueckl, J. G. (2000). Equivalent effects of inflected and derived primes: Long-term morphological priming in fragment completion and lexical decision. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehak, K. M., & Juffs, A. (2011). Native and non-native processing of morphologically complex English words: Testing the influence of derivational prefixes. In Granena, G., Koeth, J., & Lee-Ellis, S. et al. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the Second Language Research Forum 2010: Reconsidering SLA research, dimensions, and directions (pp. 125–142). Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Rueckl, J. G., Mikolinski, M., Raveh, M., Miner, C. S., & Mars, F. (1997). Morphological priming, fragment completion, and connectionist networks. Journal of Memory and Language, 36(3), 382–405. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinoshita, S., Whiting, D., & Norris, D. (2021). What masked priming effects with abbreviations can tell us about abstract letter identities. Journal of Memory and Language, 117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, S. (2009). Shall we really do it again? The powerful concept of replication is neglected in the social sciences. Review of General Psychology, 13(2), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.523CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, R., & Clahsen, H. (2008). Morphologically complex words in L1 and L2 processing: Evidence from masked priming experiments in English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(02), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728908003404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanners, R. F., Neiser, J. J., Hernon, W. P., & Hall, R. (1979). Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(4), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90219-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stump, G. T. (2001). Inflectional morphology: A theory of paradigm structure. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talamas, A., Kroll, J. F., & Dufour, R. (1999). From form to meaning: Stages in the acquisition of second-language vocabulary. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728999000140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taft, M., & Forster, K. I. (1975). Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14(6), 638–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80051-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vainio, S., Pajunen, A., & Hyönä, J. (2014). L1 and L2 word recognition in Finnish: Examining L1 effects on L2 processing of morphological complexity and morphophonological transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(01), 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263113000478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veivo, O., & Järvikivi, J. (2013). Proficiency modulates early orthographic and phonological processing in L2 spoken word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(4), 864–883. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veivo, O., Järvikivi, J., Porretta, V., & Hyönä, J. (2016). Orthographic activation in L2 spoken word recognition depends on proficiency: Evidence from eye-tracking. Front Psychol, 7, 1120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veríssimo, J., Heyer, V., Jacob, G., & Clahsen, H. (2018). Selective effects of age of acquisition on morphological priming: Evidence for a sensitive period. Language Acquisition, 25(3), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2017.1346104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voga, M., Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A., & Giraudo, H. (2014). Does morphology play a role in L2 processing?: Two masked priming experiments with Greek speakers of ESL. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 37(2), 338–352. https://doi.org/10.1075/li.37.2.10vogCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Z., & Juffs, A. (2019). Revisiting the Revised Hierarchical Model: Evidence for concept mediation in backward translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(2), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap, M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart’s N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(5), 971–979. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.5.971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q., Liang, L., Yao, P., Hu, S., & Chen, B. (2017). Parallel morpho-orthographic and morpho-semantic activation in processing second language morphologically complex words: Evidence from Chinese-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21(3), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006915624249CrossRefGoogle Scholar