Priors Persist Through Suppression: A Stroop Paradigm for Lexical Override

Glossaries, technical specifications, and system prompts routinely ask language models to use familiar words in unfamiliar ways. When this works, the lexical prior persists through override rather than being replaced: it continues to operate after the local rule applies, with the rule lowering its logit rather than installing the new meaning on top. We test this with a Stroop-style paradigm: a remapping rule ("doctor" means "forest") pitted against the query word's lexical-prior distractor ("hospital"), with matched neutral controls. Across 11 open-weight models spanning four families and 1B--9B parameters, lexical-prior strength predicts interference even after item-level controls for answer prior, frequency, tokenization, and prompt wording. Activation patching on five aligned models locates a source-position triplet (definition subject, definition target, query word) that nearly fully recovers the conflict effect (aggregate R \in [0.92, 1.06]). A definition-target swap shows the triplet performs binding rather than identity matching. Dissociation experiments isolate target preservation as the binding-specific signature: distractor suppression occurs under matched, swap, and item-mismatched conditions alike, whereas target logit collapse occurs only when the definition-target position is corrupted. Behavior and mechanism converge on the same channel: the lexical prior is where both interference originates and where override leaves its mark.