» Articles » PMID: 39803176

The Role of Morphological Information in Processing Pseudo-words in Italian L2 Learners: It's a Matter of Experience

Overview
Journal J Cogn
Publisher Ubiquity Press
Date 2025 Jan 13
PMID 39803176
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The productive use of morphological information is considered one of the possible ways in which speakers of a language understand and learn unknown words. In the present study we investigate if, and how, also adult L2 learners exploit morphological information to process unknown words by analyzing the impact of language proficiency in the processing of novel derivations. Italian L2 learners, divided into three proficiency groups, participated in a lexical decision where pseudo-words could embed existing stems (e.g., le), suffixes (e.g., hett), or both (novel derivations, e.g., ). Participants with low proficiency exhibited reduced accuracy and longer reaction times when presented with pseudo-words embedding a stem compared to those embedding a suffix. Conversely, participants with high proficiency demonstrated comparable accuracy in rejecting pseudo-words with real stems or real suffixes but required more time to reject pseudo-words embedding a suffix. In the case of novel derivations, accuracy (i.e., correct rejection) decreased and reaction time increased for all proficiency groups. Our results show that L2 learners exploit morphological information to process novel words. Most importantly, the ability to extract and exploit morphological information is linked to language proficiency.

References
1.
Marelli M, Amenta S, Crepaldi D . Semantic transparency in free stems: The effect of Orthography-Semantics Consistency on word recognition. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2014; 68(8):1571-83. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2014.959709. View

2.
Casalis S, Quemart P, Duncan L . How language affects children's use of derivational morphology in visual word and pseudoword processing: evidence from a cross-language study. Front Psychol. 2015; 6:452. PMC: 4399200. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00452. View

3.
Farhy Y, Verissimo J, Clahsen H . Universal and particular in morphological processing: Evidence from Hebrew. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2017; 71(5):1125-1133. PMC: 6159776. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2017.1310917. View

4.
Bridges D, Pitiot A, MacAskill M, Peirce J . The timing mega-study: comparing a range of experiment generators, both lab-based and online. PeerJ. 2020; 8:e9414. PMC: 7512138. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9414. View

5.
Bertram R, Laine M, Virkkala M . The role of derivational morphology in vocabulary acquisition: get by with a little help from my morpheme friends. Scand J Psychol. 2000; 41(4):287-96. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9450.00201. View