<p>Neural network modeling has played a central role in psycholinguistic studies of lexical processing, but the recent advent of large language models (LLMs) offers a different approach that may yield new insights into the mental lexicon. Four LLMs were prompted across three experiments to test how they generate psycholinguistic ratings of words in comparison with humans. LLM ratings, averaged across varying list contexts, were found to be highly correlated with human ratings, and differences in correlation strengths were partly explained by differences in rating ambiguity. LLM context manipulations strengthened correlations with human ratings through better calibration, and variability in LLM ratings was correlated with human inter-rater variability. Additional results from testing LLM generation of word naming latencies showed functional deviations from factors that underlie human word naming, indicating that lexical function assembly in LLMs is currently limited by patterns of co-occurrence in textual data. Patterns at finer-grained timescales are needed in the training data to model online lexical processes. We conclude that LLMs used context to guide the assembly of generalized lexical functions, rather than recalling ratings and latencies from training data.</p>