Long-lag morphological priming and inflectional paradigm size effects in Estonian and Finnish text reading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Morphological priming and paradigm size effects have been established in single word reading studies. Morphological priming effects have also been found in some sentence-reading studies, however, attempts to find priming effects in longer texts have failed. To our knowledge, paradigmatic effects have not yet been examined in text reading. The current study made use of the MECO corpus \citep{Siegelman:etal:2022} to explore paradigmatic and morphological priming effects in Estonian and Finnish, two morphologically rich Finno-Ugric languages. Unlike prior reports on Dutch, English and Spanish text reading, the current study showed clear long-lag inflectional priming effects. We also observed inflectional paradigm size effects for Estonian during text reading, but not for Finnish. These results suggest that inflectional variants of a particular word in Estonian and Finnish get and remain activated even when text context is present. However, effects of inflectional priming and paradigm size may be task- and language-specific. That is, they may surface only as cues when the support from an inflectional paradigm is semantically most beneficial for the reader.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".