Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Psychology of Language and Communication

The Journal of University of Warsaw

1 Issue per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.24

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.200
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.380

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2083-8506
See all formats and pricing
More options …

The Associative Structure of the Mental Lexicon: Hierarchical Semantic Relations in the Minds of Blind and Sighted Language Users

Nawoja Mikołajczak-Matyja
  • Corresponding author
  • Institute of Linguistics, Faculty of Modern Languages and Literature, Adam Mickiewicz University, Al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, Poland
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2015-05-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0001

Abstract

This paper concerns the role of hierarchical semantic relations: class inclusion and partwhole relations as factors organising the mental lexicon, and the dependence of their importance on visual perception and visual memories, as demonstrated by the results of a free association task. 58 blind and 58 sighted language users were instructed to give associations for a list of 75 Polish nouns. Semantic analysis showed that more than 40% of the whole corpus of answers was related to stimuli through the part-whole or class inclusion relations. The results of the analysis indicated many similarities, concerning both types of relations, in the feedback obtained from the blind and sighted respondents. However, the blind participants showed a significantly stronger tendency to respond with inclusive terms (hyperonyms of the stimuli) than the sighted respondents. Th e results were interpreted in terms of the specificity of the compensation processes.

Keywords: mental lexicon; semantic relation; hyponymy; meronymy; visual impairment; blindness; verbal associations

References

  • Aitchison, J. (2003). Words in the Mind. An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Andersen, E.S., Dunlea, A., & Kekelis, L.S. (1984). Blind children’s language: Resolving some differences. Journal of Child Language, 11 (3), 645-664.Google Scholar

  • Bloom, P. (2000). How Children Learn the Meanings of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Bock, J. K. (2002). Meaning, sound, and syntax. Lexical priming in sentence production. In G.T.M. Altmann (Ed.), Psycholinguistics. Critical Concepts in Psychology. Vol. 5 (pp. 378-404). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Chaffin, R. (1992). The concept of a semantic relation. In A. Lehrer & A.F. Kittay (Eds.), Frames, Fields and Contrasts (pp. 253-288). Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Chaffin, R. & Herrmann, D.J. (1984). The similarity and diversity of semantic relations. Memory and Cognition, 12 (2), 134-141.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Chaffin, R. & Herrmann, D.J. (1987). Relation element theory: a new account of the representation and processing of semantic relations. In D.S. Gorfein & R.R. Hoffman (Eds.), Memory and Learning. The Ebbinghaus Centennial Conference (pp. 221-245). Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Chaffin, R. & Herrmann, D.J. (1988). The nature of semantic relations: A comparison of two approaches. In M.W. Evens (Ed.), Relational Models of the Lexicon. Representing Knowledge in Semantic Networks (pp. 289-334). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Collins, A.M. & Qu illian, M.R. (1972). How to make a language user. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of Memory (pp. 309-351). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Cruse, D.A. (1995). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cruse, D.A. (2000). Meaning in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cruse, D.A. (2002). Hyponymy and its varieties. In R. Green, C.A. Bean, & S.H. Myaeng (Eds.), The Semantics of Relationships. An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 3-21). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Dunlea, A. (1989). Vision and the Emergence of Meaning. Blind and Sighted Children’s Early Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Elbers, L. & van Loon-Vervoorn, A. (1999). Lexical relationships in children who are blind. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 93 (7), 419-421.Google Scholar

  • Flavell, J.H., Draguns, J., Feinberg, L.D., & Budin, W. (1958). A microgenetic approach to word association. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 57 (1), 1-7.Google Scholar

  • Forster, K.I. (2002). Accessing the mental lexicon. In G.T.M. Altmann (Ed.), Psycholinguistics. Critical Concepts in Psychology. Vol. 1 (pp. 270-296). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Gerstl, P. & Pribbenov, S. (1995). Midwinters, end games, and body relations: A classification of part-whole relations. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 43 (5-6), 865-889.Google Scholar

  • Grenier, D. & Giroux, N. (1997). A comparative study of spelling performance of sighted and blind students in senior high school. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 91 (4), 393-400.Google Scholar

  • Groenveld, M. & Jan, J.E. (1992). Intelligence profiles of low vision and blind children. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 86 (1), 68-71.Google Scholar

  • Heller, M.A. (1991). Haptic perception in blind people. In M.A. Heller & W. Schiff(Eds.), The Psychology of Touch (pp. 239-261). Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Heller, M.A. & Schiff, W. (1991). Conclusions: the future of touch. In M.A. Heller & W. Schiff(Eds.), The Psychology of Touch (pp. 327-337). Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

  • Houde, O. (1990). Logical categorization: schematic knowledge, categorical knowledge, and image versus linguistic format. A study in six- to eleven-year-olds. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 10 (4), 343-384.Google Scholar

  • Hunca-Bednarska, A. (1997). Skojarzenia werbalne w schizofrenii [Verbal Associations in Schizophrenia]. Lublin: Czelej.Google Scholar

  • Jaworska-Biskup, K. (2011). The world without sight. A comparative study of concept understanding in Polish congenitally totally blind and sighted children. Psychology of Language and Communication, 15 (1), 33-47.Google Scholar

  • Levinson, S.C. (1999). From outer to inner space: Linguistic categories and nonlinguistic thinking. In J. Nuyts & E. Pederson (Eds.), Language and Conceptualization (pp. 13-45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lewis, V. (2003). Development and Disability. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Lyons, J. (1984). Semantyka 1 [Semantics 1]. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar

  • Mac Cluskie, K.C., Tunick, R.H., Dial, J.G., & Paul, D.S. (1998). The role of vision in the development of abstraction ability. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 92 (3), 189-199.Google Scholar

  • Martinez-Manrique, F. (2010). On the distinction between semantic and conceptual representation. Dialectica, 64 (1), 57-78. Mikołajczak-Matyja, N. (2004). Skojarzenia słowne niewidomych i widzących użytkownikow języka polskiego - studium porownawcze [Verbal associations of blind and sighted users of the Polish language - a comparative study]. Investigationes Linguisticae, 11, 1-17.Google Scholar

  • Mikołajczak-Matyja, N. (2008). Hierarchiczna struktura leksykonu umysłowego. Relacje semantyczne w leksykonie widzących i niewidomych użytkownikow języka [The Hierarchical Structure of Mental Lexicon. Semantic Relations in the Lexicon of Sighted and Blind Language Users]. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM. Mikołajczak-Matyja, N. (2010). The superordination relation and the symmetry of verbal associations in selected parts of the mental lexicon. Psychology of Language and Communication, 14 (2), 15-35.Google Scholar

  • Mikołajczak-Matyja, N. (2014). The distinction between the concept and the meaning of the word in light of theories of concepts structure and of speech processing models. Pensee Journal, 76 (7), 147-164.Google Scholar

  • Moss, H.E., Ostrin, R.K., Tyler, L.K., & Marslen-Wilson, W.D. (1995). Accessing different types of lexical semantic information: evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21 (4), 863-883.Google Scholar

  • Mulford, R. (1988). First words of the blind child. In M.D. Smith & J.L. Locke (Eds.), The Emerging Lexicon. The Child’s Development of a Linguistic Vocabulary (pp. 293-338). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Murphy, M.L. (2003). Semantic Relations and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Pederson, E. & Nuyts, J. (1999). Overview: On the relationship between language and conceptualization. In J. Nuyts & E. Pederson (Eds.), Language and Conceptualization (pp. 1-12). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Perez-Pereira, M. & Conti-Ramsden, G. (1999). Language Development and Social Interaction in Blind Children. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

  • Pietrulewicz, B. (1983). Rozwoj rozumowania przez analogię u dzieci niewidomych w wieku szkolnym [Development of Reasoning by Analogy in School-Age Blind Children]. Wrocław: Ossolineum.Google Scholar

  • Piskorska, A. (2008). Concepts refl ecting aesthetic judgments in blind children. In E. Mioduszewska & A. Piskorska (Eds.), Relevance Round Table (pp. 97-108). Warszawa: Wydawnictwa UW.Google Scholar

  • Pribbenov, S. (2002). Meronymic relationships: From classical mereology to complex part-whole relations. In R. Green, C.A. Bean, & S.H. Myaeng (Eds.),The Semantics of Relationships. An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 35-50). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Roder, B., Demuth, L., Streb J., & Rosler, F. (2003). Semantic and morpho-syntactic priming in auditory word recognition in congenitally blind adults. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18 (1), 1-20.Google Scholar

  • Roe, J. & Webster, A. (1997). Children with Visual Impairments: Social Interaction, Language and Learning. New York: Routledge. Russell, W.A. & Meseck, O.R. (1959). Der Einfl uss der Assoziation auf das Erinnern von Worten in der deutschen, franzosischen und englischen Sprache. Zeitschrift fur Experimentale und Angewandete Psychologie, 6, 191-211.Google Scholar

  • Sękowska, Z. (1974). Kształcenie dzieci niewidomych [Education of Blind Children]. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar

  • Szczechowicz, A. (1976). Swoistość kształtowania się pojęć u dzieci niewidomych [The specificity of concept forming in blind children]. In K. Klimasiński (Ed.), Procesy poznawcze a defekty sensoryczne. Materiały I Krajowego Sympozjum Psychologii Defektologicznej [Cognitive Processes and Sensory Deficits. Materials of I National Symposium of Defectological Psychology] (pp. 86-99). Warszawa: Polski Związek Głuchych.Google Scholar

  • Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1996). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Tillman, M.H. & Williams, C. (1968). Associative characteristics of blind and sighted children to selected form classes. International Journal for the Education of the Blind, 18 (2), 33-40.Google Scholar

  • Tobin, M. (2008). Information: A new paradigm for research into our understanding of blindness? British Journal of Visual Impairment, 26 (2), 119-127.Google Scholar

  • Tversky, B. (1990). Where partonomies and taxonomies meet. In S.L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Meaning and Prototypes. Studies in Linguistic Categorization (pp. 334-344). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Upmanyu, V.V., Bhardwaj, S., & Singh, S. (1996). Word-association emotional indicators: Associations with anxiety, psychoticism, neuroticism, extraversion, and creativity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136 (4), 521-529.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Warren, D.H. (1994). Blindness and Children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Werth, P. (1983). Meaning in language acquisition. In A.E. Mills (Ed.), Language Acquisition in the Blind Child. Normal and Deficient (pp. 77-88). London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

  • Wharton, T. (2004). Lexical acquisition and pragmatics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 16, 323-341.Google Scholar

  • Wolter, B. (2002). Assessing proficiency through word associations: Is there still hope? System, 3 (3), 315-329.Google Scholar

  • Wyver, S.R., Markham, R., & Hlavacek, S. (1999). Visual items in tests of intelligence for children. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 93 (10), 663-665.Google Scholar

  • Wyver, S.R., Markham, R., & Hlavacek, S. (2000). Inferences and word associations of children with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 94 (4), 204-217. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2015-05-29

Published in Print: 2015-05-01


Citation Information: Psychology of Language and Communication, ISSN (Online) 2083-8506, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0001.

Export Citation

© by Nawoja Mikołajczak-Matyja. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in