Korean Journal of Cognitive Science (인지과학)

The Korean Society for Cognitive Science (한국인지과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of the Initial-Sound Rule on Sino-Korean Word Recognition: Orthographies and Individual Differences in Morphological Priming

한자 합성어의 재인에서 두음 표기의 처리: 표기법과 개인차의 영향

  • Zhezhu Jin (Department of Psychology, College of Education, Yanbian University) ;
  • Donghoon Lee (Department of Psychology, Busan National University) ;
  • Sungbong Bae (Department of Psychology, Yeungnam University )
  • 김철수 (연변대학교 사범대학 심리학과) ;
  • 이동훈 (부산대학교 사회과학대학 심리학과) ;
  • 배성봉 (영남대학교 사회과학대학 심리학과)
  • Received : 2024.12.09
  • Accepted : 2024.12.18
  • Published : 2024.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

There are two orthographies for the Korean language: morphemic vs phonemic. Under the phoneme-based orthography, the application of the initial-sound rule-which alters the pronunciation of certain consonants (ㄹ, ㄴ) when they appear in word-initial positions-creates ambiguity between characters and morphemes, potentially affecting visual word recognition of Sino-Korean compounds. This study examined how this character-morpheme ambiguity is processed and how spelling rules and individual differences modulate this process. We used a masked priming lexical decision task with two groups of native Korean speakers using different orthographies: the initial-sound group (college students from Busan, South Korea) and the original-sound group (Korean-Chinese college students from Yanbian, China). Results showed that, in the initial-sound group, fast readers exhibited facilitative priming effects in both the initial-sound and original-sound conditions, while slow readers showed no priming effects. In the original-sound group, fast readers showed a priming effect only in the original-sound condition. These findings have important implications for representation and processing of Sino-Korean compound words.

시각 단어 재인은 읽기의 핵심 과정으로, 단어의 표기, 음운, 의미 정보 등을 포함한 심성어휘집의 검색에 기반한다. 본 연구는 두음법칙에 의한 한글 글자-형태소 대응의 모호성이 단어 재인에 미치는 영향을 조사하고, 표기법과 개인차가 이러한 과정에 어떻게 영향을 미치는지 분석하였다. 두음법칙에 의한 이형태 간 형태소 처리를 비교하기 위해 차폐 점화 어휘 판단 관제를 사용하였으며 표기법의 영향을 조사하기 위해 서로 다른 표기법을 사용하는 두 집단(변음집단: 대한민국 부산 거주 대학생, 본음집단: 중국 연변 조선족 대학생)을 실험 참가자로 사용하였다. 표적 단어는 본음으로 표기되는 음절을 가진 단어(예: 한랭)였으며, 이에 대한 점화 자극은 표적어와 동일 조건(예: 한랭), 변음 조건(예: 냉방), 본음 조건(예: 랭방), 무관련 통제 조건(예: 한계)의 네 가지로 조작하였다. 실험 결과, 변음 집단 중 읽기 속도가 빠른 참가자는 변음 조건과 본음 조건 모두에서 촉진적 점화 효과를 보인 반면, 읽기 속도가 느린 참가자는 점화 효과를 나타내지 않았다. 본음 집단의 경우, 빠른 반응 참가자는 본음 조건에서만 촉진적 점화 효과를 보였으며, 변음 조건에서는 점화 효과를 나타내지 않았다. 이러한 결과는 표기법의 차이와 개인의 읽기 능력이 한자 합성어의 형태소 처리에 중요한 영향을 미친다는 것을 시사한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 연구는 2022년도 한국학중앙연구원 해외한국학지원사업의 지원에 의하여 수행되었음(AKS-2022-R-059).

References

  1. 김한샘 (2005). 현대 국어 사용 빈도조사2. 서울: 국립국어연구원
  2. 배성봉, 이광오 (2010). 한국어 단어 재인에서 표기 음절과 음운 음절의 처리. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 22(3), 369-85. https://doi.org/10.22172/COGBIO.2010.22.3.007
  3. 배성봉, 이동훈 (2017). 한자어 형태소 인식력의 개인차가 형태소 점화 효과에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 29(4), 455-62. https://doi.org/10.22172/COGBIO.2017.29.4.008
  4. 이광오, 배성봉 (2009). 한국어 고유어의 인지에서 형태소 처리. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 21, 147-161. https://doi.org/10.22172/COGBIO.2009.21.3.001
  5. 이광오, 이인선 (1999). 한글단어의 인지과정에서 형태소 정보처리. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 11(1), 77-91.
  6. 이광오, 정진갑, 배성봉 (2007). 표기체계와 시각적 단어인지: 한자어의 인지에서 형태소의 표상과 처리. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 19(4), 313-27.
  7. Andrews, S., & Lo, S. (2013). Is morphological priming stronger for transparent than opaque words? It depends on individual differences in spelling and vocabulary. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.12.001
  8. Bae, S., Pae, H., & Yi, K. (2021). Modeling morphological processing in Korean: within- and cross-scriptal priming effects on the recognition of Sino-Korean compound words. Reading and Writing, 37, 943-972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10199-6
  9. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using 'Eigen' and S4. R package version 1.1-7. 2014.
  10. Chateau, D., & Jared, D. (2000). Exposure to print and word recognition processes. Memory & cognition, 28(1), 143-153. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211582
  11. Chen, H.-C., Yamauchi, T., Tamaoka, K., & Vaid, J. (2007). Homophonic and semantic priming of Japanese Kanji words: A time course study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(1), 64-69. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194029
  12. Coch, D., Hua, J., & Landers-Nelson, A. (2020). All morphemes are not the same: Accuracy and response times in a lexical decision task differentiate types of morphemes. Journal of Research in Reading, 43(3), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12306
  13. Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. New York: Penguin.
  14. Duñabeitia, J. A., Perea, M., & Carreiras, M. (2014). Revisiting letter transpositions within and across morphemic boundaries. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1557-1575. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0609-2
  15. Feldman, L. B., Frost, R., & Pnini, T. (1995). Decomposing words into their constituent morphemes: Evidence from English and Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 947.
  16. Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116-124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503
  17. Hino, Y., Lupker, S. J., Ogawa, T., & Sears, C. R. (2003). Masked repetition priming and word frequency effects across different types of Japanese scripts: An examination of the lexical activation account. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 33-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00500-4
  18. Joyce, T. (2002). Constituent-morpheme priming: Implications from the morphology of two-kanji compound words. Japanese Psychological Research, 44(2), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5884.00009
  19. Joyce, T. (2004). Modeling the Japanese mental lexicon: Morphological, orthographic and phonological consideration. In S. P. Shohov (Ed.), Advances in Psychological Research: Volume 31 (pp. 27-61). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
  20. Katz, L., & Frost, R. (1992). The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In R. Frost & L. Katz (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning (pp. 67-84). North-Holland.
  21. Kuperman, V., & Van Dyke, J. (2011). Individual differences in visual comprehension of morphological complexity. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 33. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1746d87k.
  22. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
  23. Lenth, R. V., Buerkner, P., Herve, M., Love, J., Riebl, H., & Singmann, H. (2021). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means (1.7.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved October 28, 2021, from https://CRAN.R-project. org/ package=emmeans.
  24. 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
  25. Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2014). Do masked orthographic neighbor primes facilitate or inhibit the processing of Kanji compound words? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(2), 813–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035112
  26. Perfetti, C. A. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 357-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730
  27. Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 67–86). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
  28. R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  29. 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/10.1080/01690960802069730
  30. Share, D. L. (2008). On the Anglocentricities of current reading research and practice: The perils of overreliance on an “outlier” orthography. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 584–615. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.584
  31. Share, D. L. (2021). Is the science of reading just the science of reading English? Reading Research Quarterly, 56, S391–S402. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.401
  32. Stolz, J. A., & Feldman, L. B. (1995). The role of orthographic and semantic transparency of the base morpheme in morphological processing. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 109-129). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  33. Taft, M. (2004). Morphological decomposition and the reverse base frequency effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section, 57, 745-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000477
  34. Yap, M. J., Balota, D. A., Sibley, D. E., & Ratcliff, R. (2012). Individual differences in visual word recognition: insights from the English Lexicon Project. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 38(1), 53–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024177
  35. Yi, K. (2009). Morphological representation and processing of Sino-Korean words. In C. Lee, G. B. Simpson, & Y. Kim (Eds.), The handbook of East Asian psycholinguistics (pp. 398–408). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  36. Zhou, X., Marslen-Wilson, W., Taft, M., & Shu, H. (1999). Morphology, orthography, and phonology in reading Chinese compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(5/6), 525-565. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386185