Insight into the structure of compound words among

AppliedPsycholinguistics33(2012),753–779doi:10.1017/S0142716411000555InsightintothestructureofcompoundwordsamongspeakersofChineseandEnglishJIEZHANGWesternKentuckyUniversityRICHARDC.ANDERSONUniversityofIllinoisatUrbana–ChampaignQIUYINGWANGOklahomaStateUniversityJEROMEPACKARDUniversityofIllinoisatUrbana–ChampaignXINCHUNWUandSHANTANGBeijingNormalUniversityXIAOLINGKEOklahomaStateUniversityReceived:June11,2009Acceptedforpublication:February24,2011ADDRESSFORCORRESPONDENCERichardC.Anderson,CenterfortheStudyofReading,UniversityofIllinoisatUrbana–Champaign,51GertyDrive,Champaign,IL61820.E-mail:[e-mail]mpoundwordstructuresinChineseandEnglishwasinvestigated,comparing435Chineseand258Americans,includingsecond,fourth,andsixthgraders,andcollegeundergraduates.Asanticipated,theresultsrevealedthatChinesespeakersperformedbetteronawordstructureanal-ogytaskthantheirEnglish-speakingcounterparts.Also,asanticipated,speakersofbothlanguagesperformedbetteronnoun+nounandverb+particlecompounds,whicharemoreproductiveintheirrespectivelanguagesthannoun+verbandverb+nouncompounds,whicharelessproductive.BothChineseandEnglishspeakersperformedsignificantlybetteronnovelcompoundsthanonfamiliarcompounds,mostlikelybecausefamiliarcompoundsarelexicalizedanddonotinvitedecompositionintoconstituents.ThepresentstudycomparedthedevelopmentofinsightintothestructureofseveraltypesofcompoundwordbetweennativeChinesespeakersandnativeEnglishspeakers.Morphologicalawareness,theabilitytoreflectuponandmanipulate©CambridgeUniversityPress20110142-7164/11$15.00AppliedPsycholinguistics33:4754Zhangetal.:StructureofcompoundwordsamongspeakersofChineseandEnglishmorphemesandemploywordformationrules,hasbeenextensivelyinvestigatedduringthepasttwodecades.PreviousstudiesofmorphologicalawarenessofEnglish-speakingchildrenhavefocusedonderivationalorinflectionalmorphology(e.g.,Carlisle,1988,1995,2000;Mahony,Sinhgson,&Mann,2000;Tyler&Nagy,1989,1990),andfewhaveaddressedcompoundmorphology,probablybecausecompoundwordsarelessproductivethanderivationalwordsinEnglish.Chinese,however,contrastsstronglywithEnglishintermsofwhichcategoriesofwordformationrulesaremostproductive.UnlikeEnglish,Chineseishighlyproductiveincompounding(Packard,2000),whereasrelativelyfewinflectionalandderivationalwordsexistinChinese.Inpreviousresearchonmorphologicalawareness,onlybasiccompoundstruc-tureshavebeenexamined.Theacquisitionofnoun+noun(NN)compoundsamongpreschoolchildrenhasbeenmostthoroughlyinvestigated(e.g.,Clark,1981;Clark&Berman,1984,1987;Clark,Gelman,&Lane,1985;McBride-Chang,Shu,Zhou,Wat,&Wagner,2003).Becausechildlanguagedevelopmentisgenerallycharacterizedintermsofincreasingabilitytodealwithcomplexity,especiallymorphologicalcomplexity(Clark,1993),thepresentstudyaddressedtheneedforresearchonagreatervarietyofcompoundtypes.BecauseofthedifferencesbetweenChineseandEnglish,astudyofthedevelopmentofaware-nessofcompoundstructuresinthesetwolanguagesacrossarangeofagescouldprovidevaluableinsightsintobothuniversalandlanguage-specificprocessesthatareimportantforlearningtoread(Anderson&Li,2005).STRUCTUREOFCOMPOUNDSINENGLISHANDCHINESEBasiccompoundwordsconsistoftwostemmorphemes(e.g.,classroom,cran-berry).Thestemmorphemescanbefreeroots(e.g.,classinclassroom)orboundroots(e.g.,cran-incranberry).UnlikeEnglish,whichisrichininflectionalaffixes(e.g.,-s,-ed)andderivationalaffixes(e.g.,-ly,-tion),Chinesehasabundantfreeroots(e.g.,,hua1,flower;,cha2,tea)andboundroots(e.g.,,yuan2,garden;ye4,leaf).TheprimarywayofformingcomplexwordsinChineseisbycombiningfreeorboundroots(e.g.,,hua1cha2,jasminetea;,hua1yuan2,flowergarden:,cha2ye4,tealeaves).ChinesemorphologyismoretransparentthanEnglishmorphologyforseveralreasons.First,virtuallyallChinesemorphemesconsistofonesyllable.Incontrast,morphemesinEnglishmayconsistofmorethanonesyllable,morphemebound-ariesarenotreliablymarkedbyanyphonologicalfeature,andmorphemesdonothaveasimpleonetoonecorrespondencewithsyllables(e.g.,signandsignature).Second,withrareexceptions,morphemesinChineseareinonetoonecorrespon-dencewiththebasicwritingunit:thecharacter.Third,incomparisontoEnglish,whichinvolvesfrequentshiftsinpronunciationandspellingwhenmorphemesareputtogethertoformcomplexwords,(e.g.,pronounceandpronunciation),theformationofcomplexwordsinChinesealmostneverinvolvesphonologicalchangetocomponentmorphemes,andneverinvolvesorthographicchange.Forthesereasons,identifyingindividualmorphemesinChineseisstraightforward,especiallywhencomparedtoalanguagesuchasEnglishinwhichmorphemesAppliedPsycholinguistics33:4755Zhangetal.:StructureofcompoundwordsamongspeakersofChineseandEnglishcomeindifferentsizesandshapesandconstantlychangetheirphonologicalandorthographicidentity.Selkirk(1982)offeredacomprehensiveanalysisofthestructureofEnglishcom-poundsandproposedthatcompoundnounscanbeNN(e.g.,housewife,spaceship)orverb+noun(e.g.,playground,pickpocket).Compoundverbscanbenoun+verb(NV;e.g.,browbeat,windowshop),adjective+verb(e.g.,directdial,dryclean),orverb+particle(VP;e.g.,pickup,sitdown).Generally,compoundsfollowtherigh