Empirical research on word classes and collocations in Hungarian
Part 2
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18349/MagyarNyelv.2025.4.400Keywords:
word class, noun, verb, collocation, lexical decision taskAbstract
There are several approaches to word classes and collocations in both grammar and corpus linguistics. This paper examines word class affiliation and collocability in terms of speakers’ knowledge. Our main question is the extent to which collocability and word class identity can link the mental representations of words to one another. To answer this question, we conducted lexical decision tasks with native speakers of Hungarian. The subjects were asked to decide as quickly as possible whether they saw an existing noun, an existing verb, or a nonword. The study was aimed at measuring the priming effect of words that appear before nouns and verbs in Hungarian, are related in collocation, and/or have the same word class. In our experiment, neither lexicality nor collocation showed a main effect on priming. However, there was a significant difference in reaction time between the rejection of nonwords and the recognition of real words, with nonwords being processed far more slowly than real words.
References
Aitchison, Jean 2003. Words in the Mind. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Anderson, John R. 1996/2013. The Architecture of Cognition. Psychology Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315799438
Barnbrook, Geoff – Mason, Oliver – Krishnamurthy, Ramesh 2013. Collocation and language theory: recent developments. In: Collocation. Palgrave Macmillan, London. 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137297242_7
Bates, Douglas – Mächler, Martin – Bolker, Ben – Walker, Steve 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67: 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Bybee, Joan 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10/5: 425–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969508407111
Chwill a, Dorothee J. – Hermann H. J. Kolk 2002. Three-step priming in lexical decision. Memory & Cognition 30/2: 217–225. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195282
Croft, William 2001. Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
Croft, William – Sutton, Logan 2017. Construction grammar and lexicography. In: Hanks, Patrick – de Schryver, Gill e-Maurice eds., International Handbooks of Modern Lexis and Lexicography. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45369-4_99-1
Csépe Valéria – Szűcs Dénes – Honbolygó Ferenc 2003. Number-word reading as challenging task in dyslexia? An ERP study. International Journal of Psychophysiology 51: 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-8760(03)00154-5
Ellis, Nick C. 2001. Memory for Language. Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge UP, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524780.004
Fellbaum, Christiane 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7287.001.0001
Fillmore, Charles J. – Kay, Paul – O’Connor, Mary Cathrine 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone. Language 64: 501–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/414531
Fischler, Ira – Goodman, George O. 1978. Latency of associative activation in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 4/3: 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.4.3.455
Frankenberg-Garcia, Ana – Lew, Robert – Roberts, Jonathan C. – Rees, Geraint Paul – Sharma, Nirwan 2019. Developing a writing assistant to help EAP writers with collocations in real time. ReCALL 31/1: 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0958344018000150
Goldberg, Adele 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Goodman, George O. – McClell and, Jay L. – Gibbs , Raymond W. 1981. The role of syntactic context in word recognition. Memory and Cognition 9/6: 580–586. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03202352
Hoey, Michael. 2005. Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. Routledge, London.
Hunston, Susan 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524773
Hunston, Susan – Laviosa, Sara 2000. Corpus Linguistics. CELS School of English, Birmingham.
Imrényi András 2017. Az elemi mondat viszonyhálózata. In: Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor szerk., Nyelvtan. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest. 663–895.
Jansen, Markus T. – Jansen, Nina C. – Weber, Andreas – Gadea, Guillermo Hidalgo – Ansari, Ehsan – Scheren, Pascal 2017. Semantic priming with homonymous nouns: hints of clarifying the issue of selective vs. non-selective priming. Journal of European Psychology Students 8/1: 15–29. https://doi.org/10.5334/jeps.408
Juhász Levente – Pléh Csaba 2001. Többmorfémás szavak megértése a magyarban. In: Pléh Csaba – Lukács Ágnes szerk., A magyar morfológia pszicholingvisztikája. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest. 11–38.
Kalivoda Ágnes 2021. Igekötős szerkezetek a magyarban. Doktori disszertáció. PPKE BTK.
Kenesei István 2010. How many word-classes are there after all? Abstract. International Morphology Meeting, Budapest. https://archive.nytud.hu/imm14/abs/kenesei. pdf (2025. 07. 21.)
Keszler Borbála szerk. 2000. Magyar grammatika. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.
Kiefer Ferenc 2007. Jelentéselmélet. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
Kilgarriff, Adam – Baisa, Vít – Bušta, Jan – Jakubíček, Miloš – Kovář, Vojtěch – Michelfeit, Jan – Rychlý, Pavel – Suchomel, Vít 2014. The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography 1: 7–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9
Kim, Young Shin – Oh, Sun-Young 2020. A Corpus-based analysis of collocations in Korean middle and high school English textbooks. Language Research 56/3: 437–461. https://doi.org/10.30961/lr.2020.56.3.437
É. Kiss Katalin 1992. Az egyszerű mondat szerkezete. In: Kiefer Ferenc szerk., Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 79–179.
Kutas, Marta – Schmitt, Bernadette M. 2003. Language in microvolts. In: Banich, Marie T. – Mack, Molly eds., Mind, Brain and Language: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (NJ) – London. 171–210.
Kuznetsova, Alexandra – Brockhoff, Per B. – Christensen, Rune Haubo B. 2017. ImerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software 82/13: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
Langacker, Ronald 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume I. Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
Lenth, Russel V. 2021. emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package. version 1.7.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans (2025. 07. 21.)
Marslen-Wilson, William – Warren, Patrick 1994. Levels of perceptual representation and process in lexical access: Words, phonemes, and features. Psychological Review 101/4: 653–675. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.101.4.653
Meyer, David M. – Schvaneveldt, Roger W. – Ruddy, Margaret G. 1975. Loci of contextual effects on visual word recognition. In: Rabb itt, Patrick M. A. – Dornic, Stanislav eds., Attention and Performance V. Academic Press, New York.
Miller, George – Walter Charles 1991. Contextual correlates of semantic similarity. Language and Cognitive Processes 6/1: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969108406936
Oravecz Csaba – Váradi Tamás – Sass Bálint 2014. The Hungarian gigaword corpus. Proceedings of LREC 2014. European Language Resources Association, Reykjavik. 1719–1723.
Palágyi László 2022. A metafora, az analógia és a szemantikai megfelelések szerepe a le igekötős konstrukciók jelentésében. In: Tátrai Szilárd – Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor szerk., A magyar mondat és kontextuális környezete. ELTE BTK – ELTE Eötvös Kiadó, Budapest. 15–48.
Pawley, Andrew – Syder, Frances Hodgetts 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In: Richards, Jack C. – Schmidt, Richard W. eds., Language and Communication. Longman, London. 191–226.
R Core Team 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org (2023. 09. 15.) https://doi.org/10.32614/r.manuals
Rychlý, Pavel 2008. A lexicographer-friendly association score. Proceedings of 2nd Workshop on Recent Advances in Slavonic Natural Languages Processing. RASLAN 2: 6–9.
Sinclair, John 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Sinclair, John 1996. The search for units of meaning. Textus 9: 75–106.
Skehan, Peter 1998. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Thuma Orsolya – Pléh Csaba 1995. Lexikális előfeszítés a mentális lexikonban az anyanyelv és egy tanult második nyelv között. Magyar Pszichológiai Szemle 35/5–6: 293–304.
Thuma Orsolya – Pléh Csaba 2001. Kétértelműség és dekompozíció a magyar nyelvben. In: Pléh Csaba – Lukács Ágnes szerk., A magyar morfológia pszicholingvisztikája. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest. 39–53.
Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor 2017. Jelentéstan. In: Uő. szerk., Nyelvtan. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest. 207–465.
Wickham, Hadley 2016. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York. https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (2025. 07. 21.)
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511519772
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 László Palágyi, Andrea Deme
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Magyar Nyelv is a Diamond Open Access periodical. Documents can be freely downloaded and duplicated in an electronic format, and can be used unchanged and with due reference to the original source. Such use must not serve commercial purposes. In the case of any form of dissemination and use, Hungarian Copyright Act LXXVI/1999 and related laws are to be observed. The electronic version of the journal is subject to the regulations of CC BY-NC-ND (Creative Commons – Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives).
The journal permits its authors, at no cost and without any temporal limitation, to make pre-print copies of their manuscripts publicly available via email or in their own homepage or that of their institution, or in either closed or free-for-all repositories of their institutions/universities, or other non-profit websites, in the form accepted by the journal editor for publication and even containing amendments on the basis of reviewers’ comments. When the authors publicize their papers in this manner, they have to warn their readers that the manuscript at hand is not the final published version of the work. Once the paper has been published in a printed or online form, the authors are allowed (and advised) to use that (post-print) version for the above purposes. In that case, they have to indicate the exact location and other data of the journal publication. The authors retain the copyright of their papers; however, in the case of an occasional secondary publication, the bibliographical data of the first publication have to be included.
