Paper has been my ruin: Conceptual relations of polysemous senses

157 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The processing of familiar and novel senses of a word: Why reading Dickens is easy but reading Needham can be hard (2007, background): “The absence of a frequency effect also supports the finding that words with multiple senses are processed differently from words with multiple meanings, with clear effects of frequency bias for the latter but not the former (Duffy, Morris, & Rayner, 1988 ; Frazier & Rayner, 1990 ; Pickering & Fris”
Linguistic diversity and object naming by non-native speakers of English (2003, background): “separately in memory rather than captured in a summary representation; Klein and Murphy, 2001, 2002 ).”
Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based approach to cognitive semantic analysis (2009, methodology): “method for identifying how the primary sense has developed, and empirical support for fine-grained semantic distinctions is not provided. As for the latter approach, problems relate to the vagueness of the representation and the lack of clarity concerning the status of the proposed networks. Contrar”
Concepts and categories: Memory, meaning, and metaphysics (2012, background): “Some research has attacked the issue of whether people store each of the separate senses of a polysemous term (Klein & Murphy, 2002) or store only the core meaning, deriving Rips, L. J., Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (2012).”