The time course of lexical access in speech production: A study of picture naming

Nijmegen University Nijmegen, The Netherlands Lexical access in object naming involves the activation of a set oflexical candidates, the selection of the appropriate (or target) item, and the phonological encoding of that item. Two views of lexical access in naming are compared. From one view, the 2-stage theory, phonological activation follows selection of the target item and is restricted to that item. From the other view, which is most explicit in activation-spreading theories, all activated lexical candidates are phonologically activated to some extent. A series of experiments is reported in which subjects performed acoustic lexical decision during object naming at different stimulus-onset asynchronies. The experiments show semantic activation of lexical candidates and phonological activation of the target item, but no phonological activation of other semantically activated items. This supports the 2-stage view. More- over, a mathematical model embodying the 2-stage view is fully compatible with the lexical deci- sion data obtained at different stimulus-onset asynchronies. One of a speaker's core skills is to lexicalize the concepts intended for expression. Lexicalization proceeds at a rate of two to three words per second in normal spontaneous speech, but doubling this rate is possible and not exceptional. The skill of lexicalizing a content word involves two components. The first one is to select the appropriate lexical item from among some tens of thousands of alternatives in the mental lexicon. The second one is to phonologically encode the selected item, that is, to retrieve its sound form, to create a phonological represen- tation for the item in its context, and to prepare its articulatory program. An extensive review of the literature on lexicalization can be found in Levelt (1989). This article addresses only one aspect of lexicalization, namely its time course. In particular, we examine whether the selection of an item and its phonologi- cal encoding can be considered to occur in two successive, non- overlapping stages. We acknowledge the invaluable contributions of John Nagengast and Johan Weustink, who programmed the computer-based experi- ments; ofGer Desserjer and Hans Fransen, who ran the experiments and assisted in data analysis; and of lnge Tarim, who provided graphi- cal assistance. We also acknowledge Gary Dell's and Picnic Zwitser- lood's detailed comments on an earlier version of this article, as well as the thorough comments of an anonymous reviewer. Herbert Schriefers is now at Freie Universit~it Berlin, Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany, and Thomas Pechmann is now at Universit~it des Saarlandes, Saarbriicken, Federal Republic of Germany. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Wil- lem J. M. Levelt, Max-Planck-lnstitut for Psycholinguistik, Wundtlaan 1, NL-6525 XD Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 122 This is by no means a novel concept. One should rather say that it is the received view in the psycholinguistic literature (see especially Butterworth, 1980, 1989; Fromkin, 1971; Garrett, 1975, 1976, 1980; Kempen, 1977, 1978; Kempen & Huijbers, 1983; Levelt, 1983, 1989; Levelt & Maassen, 1981; Morton, 1969; Schriefers, Meyer, & Levelt, 1990). The first stage, lexical selection, makes available a semantically specified lexical item with its syntactic constraints. Kempen (1977, 1978) called this a lemma. Lemmas figure in grammatical encoding, specifically in the creation of syntactic frames. During the second stage, phonological encoding, phonological information is retrieved for each lemma. These phonological codes are used to create the articulatory plan for the utterance as a whole. Both Garrett (1976) and Kempen (1978), following Fry (1969), have stressed that the grammatical encoding and phonological encoding of an utterance normally run in parallel. Grammatical encoding, of which lexical selection is a proper part, is just slightly ahead of phonological encoding. The phonological encoding of a given item overlaps in time with the selection of a subsequent item. Only at the level of individual lexical items can one speak of successive stages. An item's semantic-syntactic makeup is accessed and used before its phonological makeup becomes available. Garrett (1975, 1976) argued for this separation of stages on the basis of speech error data. He distinguished between two classes of errors, word exchanges and sound exchanges, and could show that these classes differ in distributional properties. Word exchanges occur between phrases and involve words of the same syntactic category (as in this spring has a seat in it). Sound exchanges typically involve different category words in the same phrase (as in heft lemisphere). Word exchanges are