Morphological Processing of Complex Words in Turkish

Year 2025, Volume: 19 Issue: 1, 111 - 131, 30.06.2025

Samet Deniz , Zeynep Doyuran

https://doi.org/10.47777/cankujhss.1574188

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to examine how native speakers of Turkish process morphologically complex words when they are presented with masked primes. The present paper also seeks to find out whether semantics and/or orthography play a role in the early stages of morphological processing. A masked priming visual word recognition experiment was conducted with 44 Turkish speakers. Based on the accuracy rates and reaction times of the participants, this study aimed to figure out the organization of the mental lexicon. The results showed statistically significant priming effects for transparent items while no significant priming was revealed for the opaque and form items. These results replicate earlier studies and indicate that native speakers of Turkish decompose inflectionally and derivationally complex words in the early stages of visual word recognition. Moreover, the results also suggest that early morphological processing is blind to orthographic properties.

Keywords

psycholinguistics, morphological processing, masked priming, inflectional/derivational morphology, orthographic/semantic effects

Türkçedeki Karmaşık Sözcüklerin Biçimbilimsel İşlemlenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkçe anadili konuşurlarının, maskelenmiş hazırlama sözcükleriyle karşılaştıklarında biçimbilimsel olarak karmaşık sözcükleri nasıl işlemlediklerini incelemektir. Bu makale ayrıca anlambilim ve/veya yazımın biçimbilimsel işlemlemenin erken aşamalarında bir rol oynayıp oynamadığını bulmayı amaçlamaktadır. 44 Türkçe konuşuruyla maskelenmiş hazırlama görsel sözcük tanıma deneyi yürütülmüştür. Katılımcıların doğruluk oranlarına ve tepki sürelerine dayanarak, bu çalışma zihinsel sözlüğün organizasyonunu bulmayı amaçlamıştır. Sonuçlar, saydam sözcük çiftleri için istatistiksel olarak anlamlı hazırlama etkileri gösterirken, geçirimsiz ve biçim sözcük çiftleri için anlamlı bir hazırlama etkisi ortaya çıkmamıştır. Bu sonuçlar önceki çalışmaları tekrarlamaktadır ve Türkçe anadili konuşurlarının görsel sözcük tanımanın erken aşamalarında çekimlenmiş ve türetilmiş karmaşık sözcükleri ayrıştırdığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, sonuçlar erken biçimbilimsel işlemlemenin yazımsal özelliklere bağlı olmadığını da göstermektedir.

Keywords

ruhdilbilim, biçimbilimsel işlemleme, maskelenmiş hazırlama, çekimsel/türetimsel biçimbilim, yazımsal/anlamsal etkiler

Ethical Statement

An ethics committee approval was granted by Hacettepe University, Ethics Committee before the experimental session started.

Supporting Institution

Hacettepe University, Ethics Committee

References

• Aksan, D. (1987). Türkçenin gücü. İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
• Anderson, S. R. (1992). A-morphous morphology. Cambridge University Press.
• Aronoff, M. (1994). Morphology by itself: Stems and inflectional classes. MIT Press.
• Blevins, J. P. (2006). English inflection and derivation. In B. Aarts, & A. M. McMahon (Eds.), The Handbook of English Linguistics (pp. 507–536). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch22
• Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. Henry Holt.
• Bochner, H. (1992). Simplicity in Generative Morphology. Mouton de Gruyter.
• Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2005). Discontinuous morphology in time: Incremental masked priming in Arabic. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1–2), 207–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960444000106
• Butterworth, B. (1983). Lexical representation. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language Production (pp. 257–294). Academic Press.
• Carlisle, R. S., Charmley, T., Salgueiro-Carlisle, M., & Bennett, K. (1997). Errors with inflectional morphemes in the English compositions of LEP students. In A. Melby (Ed.), The Twenty-Third LACUS Forum 1996 (pp. 461–474). The Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States.
• Clahsen, H., Eisenbeiss, S., Hadler, M., & Sonnenstuhl, I. (2001). The mental representation of inflected words: An experimental study of adjectives and verbs in German. Language, 77(3), 510–543. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2001.0140
• 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.2011.01.003
• Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (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.16.4.684
• Feldman, L. B., Kostić, A., Gvozdenović, V., O’Connor, P. A., & Moscoso del Prado Martín, F. (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-x
• Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10(4), 680–698. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.10.4.680
• Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503
• Frauenfelder, U. H., & Schreuder, R. (1992). Constraining psycholinguistic models of morphological processing and representation: The role of productivity. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991 (pp. 165–183). Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2516-1_10
• Gacan, P. (2014). The morphological processing of derived words in L1 Turkish and L2 English (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University.
• Gernsbacher, M. A. (1994). Handbook of psycholinguistics. Academic Press.
• Grainger, J., Colé, P., & Segui, J. (1991). Masked morphological priming in visual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(3), 370–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90042-I
• Gürel, A. (1999). Decomposition: To what extent? The case of Turkish. Brain and Language, 68(1), 218–224. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2085
• Hankamer, J. (1989). Morphological parsing and the lexicon. In W. D. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 392–408). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4213.003.0018
• Harley, H., & Noyer, R. (1999). State-of-the-article: Distributed Morphology. GLOT, 4, 3–9.
• Heyer, V., & Clahsen, H. (2014). 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(3), 543–550. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000662
• Jacob, G., Heyer, V., & Veríssimo, J. (2017). 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/10.1177/1367006916688333
• Jacob, G., Şafak, D. F., Demir, O., & Kırkıcı, B. (2018). Preserved morphological processing in heritage speakers: A masked priming study on Turkish. Second Language Research, 35(2), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658318764535
• Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 627–633. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.627
• 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(4), 776–791. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000648
• Ling, C. X., & Marinov, M. (1993). Answering the connectionist challenge: a symbolic model of learning the past tenses of English verbs. Cognition, 49(3), 235–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(93)90006-H
• Longtin, C., Segui, J., & Hallé, P. (2003). Morphological priming without morphological relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(3), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960244000036
• Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
• Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Bozic, M., & Randall, B. (2008). Early decomposition in visual word recognition: Dissociating morphology, form, and meaning. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(3), 394–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701588004
• Marslen-Wilson, W. D., 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.101.1.3
• Matthews, P. H. (1991). Morphology. Cambridge University Press.
• Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of language. Science, 253(5019), 530–535. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1857983
• Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. HarperCollins.
• 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(4-5), 507–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960050119689
• 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/BF03196742
• Rumelhart, D. E., and McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In D.E. Rumelhart (Ed.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (pp. 216–271). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5782.003.0031
• Say, B., Zeyrek, D., Oflazer, K., & Özge, U. (2002). Development of a corpus and a treebank for present-day written Turkish. In K. İmer & G. Doğan (Eds.), Current research in Turkish linguistics: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics (pp. 183–192). Eastern Mediterranean University.
• 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(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003404
• Sonnenstuhl, I., Eisenbeiss, S., & Clahsen, H. (1999). Morphological priming in the German mental lexicon. Cognition, 72(3), 203–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00033-5
• Stump, G. T. (1998). Inflection. In A. Spencer & M. Zwicky (Eds.), Handbook of morphology (pp. 13–43). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405166348.ch1
• Şafak, D. F. (2015). Morphological processing of inflected and derived words in L1 Turkish and L2 English (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University.
• 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-X
• Veríssimo, J., & Clahsen, H. (2009). Morphological priming by itself: A study of Portuguese conjugations. Cognition, 112(1), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.04.003