Korean Journal of Cognitive Science (인지과학)

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

DOI QR Code

Variables affecting Korean word recognition: focusing on syllable shape

한글 단어 재인에 영향을 미치는 변인: 음절 형태를 중심으로

  • Received : 2018.11.02
  • Accepted : 2018.11.28
  • Published : 2018.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated that word frequency, word length, neighborhood and word shape may have a role in visual word recognition. Shape information may affect word processing in different ways as Korean letter system works differently than that of English. The purpose of this study was to apply Gestalt's continuity principle to Korean alphabetic script(hangul), and to investigate the processing unit of hangul and to verify whether syllable shape affects word recognition in hangul. In experiment 1, three syllable words were utilized and two variables; 1) syllable types(horizontal syllable shape, e.g., "가". vertical syllable shape, e.g., "고") and 2) presenting direction (horizontal, vertical) were manipulated. Whereas "가" meets the criteria of Gestalt's continuity principle, "고" does not. Based on the result of lexical decision time, horizontal syllable shape type showed significant performance improvement, when compared to vertical syllable shape type, regardless of the presenting direction. In experiment 2, syllable types(horizontal syllable shape, vertical syllable shape) and the visual relationship between prime and target(identical, similar, different) were manipulated by using masked priming. There was a significant performance difference between the visual relationship of prime and target, and thus the effect of syllable shape was verified.

시각 단어 재인에 영향을 미치는 변인으로는 단어 빈도, 단어 길이, 이웃단어, 단어 형태 등이 밝혀진 바 있다. 단어 형태 변인은 한글이 영어와는 글자 체계가 다르기 때문에 형태 정보가 단어 처리에 다른 방식으로 영향을 미칠 수 있다. 본 연구는 게스탈트의 연속성 원리를 한글에 적용하여 한글 단어의 처리 단위를 알아보고, 음절 형태가 한글 단어 재인에 영향을 미치는지 검증하고자 하였다. 실험 1에서는 3음절 단어를 사용하여 음절 유형(평소 읽기방향이 연속성 원리에 부합하는 '가로집자'형(예: "가"), 부합하지 않는 '세로집자'형(예: "고")과 글자 제시 방향(가로, 세로)을 조작하였다. 어휘 판단 시간의 분석 결과, 제시 방향에 상관없이 '가로집자'형의 처리 속도가 '세로집자'형보다 빨랐다. 실험 2에서는 차폐 점화를 사용하여 음절유형('가로집자'와 '세로집자'형) 및 점화 자극과 목표 자극의 시각적 관계(동일, 유사, 상이)를 조작하였다. 점화자극과 목표자극의 음절집자 형태에 따라서 수행에 차이가 있었으며 이는 음절 형태가 단어 재인에 미친다는 것을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 강승식 (1998). 한글 문장의 자동 띄어쓰기. 한국정보과학회 언어공학연구회 학술발표 논문집(pp. 137-142).
  2. 권유안, 이윤형 (2014). 시각적 단어재인과정에서 단어 빈도와 단어 길이 효과의 발현 시점. 언어과학연구, 69, 43-62.
  3. 권유안, 조혜숙, 김충명, 남기춘 (2006). 한국어 시각단어재인에서 나타나는 이웃효과. 말소리, 60(0), 29-45.
  4. 김호영, 정찬섭 (1992). 명조체와 샘물체 단어모양이 한글인식에 미치는 효과. 한국정보과학회 언어공학연구회 학술발표 논문집(pp. 259-267).
  5. 이광오, 배성봉 (2009). 한국어 음절의 표기 빈도와 형태소 빈도가 단어인지에 미치는 효과. 인지과학, 20(3), 309-333.
  6. 이준석, 김경린 (1989). 한글 낱말의 처리 단위, 인지과학, 1(2), 221-239.
  7. 최양규 (1986). 음절수가 한글 단어재인 반응 시간에 미치는 영향. 석사학위 논문, 부산대학교, 부산.
  8. Burt, J. S. & Hutchinson, B. J. (2000). Case-mixing effects on spelling recognition: The importance of test format. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(4), 433-451. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005159329417
  9. Forster, K. I. (1998). The pros and cons of masked priming. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 27(2), 203-233. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023202116609
  10. Forster, K. I. & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 35(1), 116-124. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195503
  11. Gallace, A. & Spence, C. (2011). To what extent do Gestalt grouping principles influence tactile perception?. Psychological bulletin, 137(4), 538-561. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022335
  12. Haber, L. R., Haber, R. N., & Furlin, K. R. (1983). Word length and word shape as sources of information in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 165-189.
  13. Haber, R. N. & Schindler, R. M. (1981). Error in proofreading: Evidence of syntactic control of letter processing?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(3), 573-579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.7.3.573
  14. Healy, A. F. & Cunningham, T. F. (1992). A developmental evaluation of the role of word shape in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 20(2), 141-150. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197163
  15. Korean Word Database (2001). 21th century Seiong project corpus. The National Institute of the Korean Language, Seoul, Korea.
  16. Kroll, J. F. & Smith, J. (1989). Naming pictures and words in categories. In Poster presented at the 1st annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, Alexandria, VA.
  17. Lavidor, M. (2011). Whole-word shape effect in dyslexia. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(4), 443-454. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01444.x
  18. Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 21(3), 451-468. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.451
  19. Lee, C. H. & Taft, M. (2009). Are onsets and codas important in processing letter position? A comparison of TL effects in English and Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 60(4), 530-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.002
  20. Lete, B. & Pynte, J. (2003). Word-shape and word-lexical-frequency effects in lexical-decision and naming tasks. Visual cognition, 10(8), 913-948. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280344000112
  21. Lotto, L., Job, R., & Rumiati, R. (1999). Visual effects in picture and word categorization. Memory & cognition, 27(4), 674-684. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211561
  22. Mayall, K. & Humphreys, G. W. (1996). Case mixing and the task sensitive disruption of lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22(2), 278-294. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.2.278
  23. Mayall, K., Humphreys, G. W., & Olson, A. (1997). Disruption to word or letter processing? The origins of case-mixing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(5), 1275-1286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1275
  24. McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological review, 88(5), 375-407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.5.375
  25. Monk, A. F. & Hulme, C. (1983). Errors in proofreading: Evidence for the use of word shape in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 11(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197657
  26. Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., & Lupker, S. J. (2008). Masked priming with orthographic neighbors: A test of the lexical competition assumption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(5), 1236-1260. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1236
  27. Osterhout, L., Bersick, M. & McKinnon, R. (1997). Brain potentials elicited by words: Word Length and frequency predict the latency of an early negativity. Biological Psychology, 46(2), 143-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0511(97)05250-2
  28. Perea, M. & Panadero, V. (2014). Does viotin activate violin more than viocin?. Experimental psychology, 61(1), 23-29. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000223
  29. Perea, M. & Rosa, E. (2002). Does 'whole-word shape' play a role in visual word recognition?. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 64(5), 785-794. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194745
  30. Rudnicky, A. I. & Kolers, P. A. (1984). Size and case of type as stimuli in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(2), 231-249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.10.2.231
  31. Segui, J. & Grainger, J. (1990). Priming word recognition with orthographic neighbors: Effects of relative prime-target frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(1), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.16.1.65
  32. Simpson, G. B. & Kang, H. (2004). Syllable processing in alphabetic Korean. Reading and Writing, 17, 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:READ.0000013808.65933.a1
  33. Smith, F. (1969). Familiarity of configuration vs. discriminability of features in the visual identification of words. Psychonomic Science, 14(6), 261-263. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329112
  34. Snodgrass, J. G. & McCullough, B. (1986). The role of visual similarity in picture categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12(1), 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.12.1.147
  35. Vitkovitch, M., Humphreys, G. W., & Lloyd-Jones, T. J. (1993). On naming a giraffe a zebra: Picture naming errors across different object categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19(2), 243-259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.2.243
  36. Wagemans, J., Elder, J. H., Kubovy, M., Palmer, S. E., Peterson, M. A., Singh, M. et al. (2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological bulletin, 138(6), 1172-1217. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029333
  37. Wagemans, J., Feldman, J., Gepshtein, S., Kimchi, R., Pomerantz, J. R., van der Helm, P. A. et al. (2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations. Psychological bulletin, 138(6), 1218-1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029334
  38. Witte, K. L., Freund, J. S., & Csiki, I. (2002). Case-mixing effects on anagram solution. The Journal of general psychology, 129(2), 117-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300209603132