Sep 2026· The Mental Lexicon· 0 citations· 40 references
Abstract
The nature of the mental lexicon remains one of the central controversies in cognitive science, bearing on
fundamental questions concerning the representation and processing of linguistic knowledge. In this article, we examine Gary
Libben’s contributions to the study of lexical representation and processing, with particular focus on the theoretical and
empirical studies leading to the “flexicon” framework. We address four interrelated questions that have guided both Libben’s
research program and broader debates in psycholinguistics: (a) What are the basic units of lexical representation? (b) Do
morphologically complex words undergo decomposition during recognition? (c) To what extent are perceptual analyses constrained by
morphological principles? And (d) does semantic information penetrate the earliest stages of lexical processing? Drawing on
Libben’s theoretical writings and a selection of empirical studies spanning four decades of research, we situate his proposals
within competing accounts of the mental lexicon, including symbolic, connectionist, Bayesian, and hybrid approaches. We argue that
the flexicon framework represents an attempt to reconcile aspects of these traditions by combining morphemes and full-word forms,
dynamic lexical representations, and usage-based influences within a system aimed at maximizing opportunities for lexical use. We
review evidence from studies involving aphasia, deep dyslexia, compound processing, and morphological ambiguity in trimorphemic
words, assessing the extent to which the findings support the framework’s central claims. While the flexicon provides an
innovative perspective on lexical flexibility and morphological productivity, we argue that several questions remain regarding the
role of constituent structure, morphological computation, and semantic information in lexical processing. We conclude by
suggesting that the flexicon is best viewed as a research program that raises important questions about the relationship between
lexical representations, linguistic structure, and language use.
Bilingualism research sits at the intersection of linguistics, cognitive neuroscience, and psychology, yet these
disciplines often operate in relative isolation, limiting explanatory power and theoretical progress. This paper argues that
deeper, more purposeful cross-fertilization among these fields is both possibl...
Jason Rothman, David Miller, V. DeLuca et al.· Linguistic Approaches to Bil...· 0 citations
In this paper, I propose a formal model of the representation and processing of an integrated multilingual phonological grammar. Two options are considered: (a) a merged union of features from all languages, and (b) an integrated repository which includes representational language tags on hierarchical phonological stru...
The traditional distinction between content and function words continues to underpin much psycholinguistic research, even though other areas of linguistics have long recognized it as problematic (e.g. Bennis et al., 1983, and Ishkhanyan et al., 2017 within aphasiology; Diessel, 1999: 150–153, and Bisang, 2010: 291 with...
Solvej Wilbrandt Jaeger, Kasper Boye· Journal of Psycholinguistic...· 0 citations
This paper consists of two interconnected parts, both challenging mainstream computational views of mind and intelligence. In the first part, the author argues for a fundamental reconceptualization of cognition. He contends that the success of neural network-based AI and the universal properties of human language expos...
John-Michael M. Kuczynski· Communication & Cognitio...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.