From Lexicon to Flexicon: The Principles of Morphological Transcendence and Lexical Superstates in the Characterization of Words in the Mind
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of mental lexicon research has benefitted greatly from the founding metaphor of a dictionary in the mind. That metaphor, however, had its origins in a perspective in which the lexicon was seen as a static repository of representations with fixed structural properties. This paper presents a contrasting view. It is a view that highlights that words are activities that we perform, rather than simply representations that we have. It is proposed that lexical representations are best seen as hierarchies of action within a highly interconnected and dynamic system. The paper presents two principles of lexical organization: morphological transcendence and lexical superstates . The former principle claims that through the activities of language comprehension and production, lexical forms can develop variant forms. Thus, the form key may develop into forms such as key - (e.g., keyboard) and -key , (e.g., turnkey ). The paper also discusses how transcendence leads to lexical superstates, which do not have a fixed morphological structure. As part of a lexical superstate, alternative morphological structures exist as potential realizations. Which one is actually realized will depend on the specific circumstances of a lexical action. An account is presented in which the effects of semantic transparency are treated in terms of transcendence and superstate interactions. It is claimed that this approach, which highlights the dynamic and flexible nature of the mental lexicon, has implications for how we approach the modeling of language and cognition in general.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".