Identification of Letters in the Predesignated Target Paradigm: A Word Superiority Effect for the Common Word the

1990 ◽  
Vol 103 (3) ◽  
pp. 299 ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Peterzell ◽  
Grant P. Sinclair ◽  
Alice F. Healy ◽  
Lyle E. Bourne
Keyword(s):  
Common Word ◽  
Word Superiority Effect ◽  
Superiority Effect ◽  
The Common

An analysis of the word-superiority effect

1973 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Baron ◽  
Ian Thurston
Keyword(s):  
Word Superiority Effect ◽  
Superiority Effect

Perceptual and lexical effects in letter identification: An event-related potential study of the word superiority effect

2006 ◽  
Vol 1098 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara D. Martin ◽  
Tatjana Nazir ◽  
Guillaume Thierry ◽  
Yves Paulignan ◽  
Jean-François Démonet
Keyword(s):  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Word Superiority Effect ◽  
Letter Identification ◽  
Superiority Effect ◽  
Potential Study ◽  
Lexical Effects

Letter Identification in Words and Non-Words, with Variation in Visual Angle and Delay of Position Cue

Perception ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T Solman
Keyword(s):  
Serial Position ◽  
Letter String ◽  
Visual Angle ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Word Superiority Effect ◽  
Letter Identification ◽  
Superiority Effect ◽  
Critical Letter ◽  
Contextual Constraint ◽  
Perceptual Locus

Two experiments are described in which subjects were required to report the name of a single position-cued ‘critical’ letter in a tachistoscopically displayed string of four letters. The stimulus characters were arranged to form three types of letter strings: (i) strings in which the letters did not form words; (ii) words in which contextual constraint of the critical letters was minimised; and (iii) words in which contextual constraint of the critical letters was maximised. The serial position of the letter to be identified in each string was cued at delays of −500, −100, and +500 ms, in experiment 1 and at delays of −510 and +510 ms in experiment 2, and in both experiments one group of subjects responded to letter strings which subtended a horizontal visual angle of 3·95 deg, while a second group responded to strings which subtended 1·02 deg. Correct identifications of critical letters showed that the presentation of words resulted in superior performance. This ‘word superiority effect’ is consistent with earlier findings implying that it has a perceptual locus. For the stimuli which subtended the large visual angle the word advantage was detrimentally affected only when the position of the critical letter to be identified was cued either 500 or 510 ms prior to the display of the letter string.

Hapax Legomena and the Idiolect of John

2014 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-153
Author(s):  
Hellen Mardaga
Keyword(s):  
Related Word ◽  
Common Word ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Semantic Domain ◽  
The Common ◽  
First John ◽  
Hapax Legomena

AbstractThe present contribution treats hapax legomena in the Fourth Gospel. The author presents three important findings. First, John has few hapaxes in his gospel (84) and only five hapaxes are unique (i.e. these words are mainly used after the composition of the Fourth Gospel). Second, the presence of hapaxes could be an indicator of orality and memory. Third, in several instances John uses hapaxes in conjunction with repetitions in two ways: 1) In John 2:14-16; 12:14; 18:3; 19:39-40 a hapax is followed by a (more) common word that belongs to the same semantic domain as the hapax. The common word repeats and clarifies the meaning of the hapax to the audience; 2) In John 4:7, 11, 15, 20-24; 9:1-2, 6, 8; 11:11-13; 13:5 a hapax is created by means of a stem-related word. The alteration between repetition and hapaxes helps the audience to focus on the narrative and follow the line of thought.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document