Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Three experiments investigated the interpretation of conceptual combinations such as peeled apples. These experiments focused on verification of combination properties. Some properties (e.g., “round” for peeled apples) were verifiable by virtue of the noun alone, whereas others (e.g., “white” for peeled apples) required the combination of adjective and noun and generation of a new property not associated with either. Surprisingly, combination properties were verified more easily than noun properties, even under conditions of extremely rapid presentation. This finding contradicts a simple compositional model of combination in which components are analyzed prior to interpretation of the overall combination meaning. The implications for models of conceptual combination are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baron

(1978), The word-superiority effect: Perceptual learning from reading. In Estes

W.K.

, (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes: Vol. 6. Linguistic functions in cognitive theory (pp.131–166). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hampton

J.A.

(1987). Inheritance of attributes in natural concept conjunctions. Memory & Cognition, 15, 55–71.

Hampton

J.A.

Springer

(1989). Long speeches are boring: Verifying properties of conjunctive concepts. Paper presented at the 30th meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Atlanta.

Medin

D.L.

Shoben

E.J.

(1988), Context and structure in conceptual combination. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 58–190.

Murphy

G.L.

(1988). Comprehending complex concepts. Cognitive Science, 12, 529–562.

Murphy

G.L.

(1990). Noun phrase interpretation and conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 259–288.

Murphy

G.L.

Medin

D.L.

(1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92, 289–316.

Onifer

Swinney

D.A.

(1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension; Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory & Cognition, 9, 225–236.

Potter

M.C.

Faulconer

B.A.

(1979). Understanding noun phrases. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 509–522.

10.

Smith

E.E.

(1978). Theories of semantic memory. In Estes

W.K.

, (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes: Vol. 6. Linguistic functions in cognitive theory (pp.1–56), Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.

11.

Smith

E.E.

Osherson

D.N.

Rips

L.J.

Keane

(1988). Combining prototypes: A modification model. Cognitive Science, 12, 485–527.

12.

Swinney

D.A.

(1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–660.

13.

Weber

S.H.

(1989). A structured connectionist approach to direct inferences and figurative adjective-noun combinations. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester.

14.

Wisniewski

E.J.

Gentner

(1991). On the combinatorial semantics of noun pairs: Minor and major adjustments to meaning. In Simpson

G.B.

, (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence (pp.241–284). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Feature Availability in Conceptual Combination

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References