Typing /s/--Morphology between the Keys?
Saved in:
| Title: | Typing /s/--Morphology between the Keys? |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Julia Muschalik (ORCID |
| Source: | Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2025 38(7):2025-2058. |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 34 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Morphology (Languages), Phoneme Grapheme Correspondence, Written Language, Oral Language, Keyboarding (Data Entry), English, Articulation (Speech), Time Factors (Learning) |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11145-024-10586-9 |
| ISSN: | 0922-4777 1573-0905 |
| Abstract: | Morphological structure exerts an influence on acoustic duration. But does it also influence typing duration? The present article reports an experimental study that tests for the influence of morphological structure on typing timing. It is also a first of its kind comparison between spoken and written language production within the same paradigm, which explores the extent to which a pattern that has been found for speech production may have an analogue in written language production. In an online typing study using the experimental design of Schmitz et al. (Phonetica 78:571-616, 2021a), we test their results from the spoken domain for transferability to the written domain. Specifically, our study investigates whether language users type word-final < s > in English pseudowords at different word-internal boundaries--non-morphemic, plural, auxiliary "has"-clitic and "is"-clitic--with differing speeds and how our results compare to those found by Schmitz et al. (Phonetica 78:571-616, 2021a) for articulation. We find that the influence of morphological structure on articulation and typing timing does not follow an identical principle. While durational differences are found for the different morphological categories in articulation, participants in our experiment type non-morphemic < s > and plural < s > at almost identical speed. A significant difference emerges, however, for the typing of auxiliary clitics. Our results suggest that processing units other than morphemes might be dominant in written language production. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1482621 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Morphological structure exerts an influence on acoustic duration. But does it also influence typing duration? The present article reports an experimental study that tests for the influence of morphological structure on typing timing. It is also a first of its kind comparison between spoken and written language production within the same paradigm, which explores the extent to which a pattern that has been found for speech production may have an analogue in written language production. In an online typing study using the experimental design of Schmitz et al. (Phonetica 78:571-616, 2021a), we test their results from the spoken domain for transferability to the written domain. Specifically, our study investigates whether language users type word-final < s > in English pseudowords at different word-internal boundaries--non-morphemic, plural, auxiliary "has"-clitic and "is"-clitic--with differing speeds and how our results compare to those found by Schmitz et al. (Phonetica 78:571-616, 2021a) for articulation. We find that the influence of morphological structure on articulation and typing timing does not follow an identical principle. While durational differences are found for the different morphological categories in articulation, participants in our experiment type non-morphemic < s > and plural < s > at almost identical speed. A significant difference emerges, however, for the typing of auxiliary clitics. Our results suggest that processing units other than morphemes might be dominant in written language production. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0922-4777 1573-0905 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11145-024-10586-9 |
