The interpretation of animate nouns in child and adult Mandarin: from the Universal Grinder to syntactic structure

IF 1.3 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistics Pub Date : 2024-03-15 DOI:10.1515/ling-2021-0184
Aijun Huang, Xiaomei Zhang, Stephen Crain
{"title":"The interpretation of animate nouns in child and adult Mandarin: from the Universal Grinder to syntactic structure","authors":"Aijun Huang, Xiaomei Zhang, Stephen Crain","doi":"10.1515/ling-2021-0184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Using animate nouns to refer to entities in the world involves a complex interaction of ontology, cognition and language. The present study evaluates two accounts of the use of animate nouns, with Mandarin Chinese as the vehicle for testing between the competing accounts. One account was proposed by Cheng et al. (2008. How universal is the Universal Grinder? In Marjo van Koppen & Bert Botma (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, 50–62. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins). These researchers contend that the count interpretation is basic for Mandarin animate nouns, due to a lexical blocking effect. To access the alternative, mass interpretation requires some kind of pragmatic coercion. A second account was proposed by Pelletier, based on English (1975. Non-Singular reference: Some preliminaries. Philosophia 5(4). 451–465; 2012. Lexical nouns are both +MASS and +COUNT, but they are neither +MASS nor + COUNT. In Diane Massam (ed.), Count and mass across languages, 9–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press). We extend this account to Mandarin animate nouns, proposing that they are encoded in the mental lexicon with both a count sense and a mass sense. To adjudicate between the accounts, we conducted four experiments that were designed to assess the interpretation assigned to animate nouns by Mandarin-speaking children and adults. The experimental conditions manipulated both the syntactic structures of the sentences and the non-linguistic contexts in which those sentences were presented. The experimental findings support our proposal that both mass and count interpretations of animate nouns are available to children and adults when sentences are presented in contexts that are congruent with these interpretations. The findings also suggest that syntactic structure is an even more critical factor in determining the interpretation that is assigned to animate nouns in Mandarin.","PeriodicalId":47548,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2021-0184","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Using animate nouns to refer to entities in the world involves a complex interaction of ontology, cognition and language. The present study evaluates two accounts of the use of animate nouns, with Mandarin Chinese as the vehicle for testing between the competing accounts. One account was proposed by Cheng et al. (2008. How universal is the Universal Grinder? In Marjo van Koppen & Bert Botma (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, 50–62. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins). These researchers contend that the count interpretation is basic for Mandarin animate nouns, due to a lexical blocking effect. To access the alternative, mass interpretation requires some kind of pragmatic coercion. A second account was proposed by Pelletier, based on English (1975. Non-Singular reference: Some preliminaries. Philosophia 5(4). 451–465; 2012. Lexical nouns are both +MASS and +COUNT, but they are neither +MASS nor + COUNT. In Diane Massam (ed.), Count and mass across languages, 9–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press). We extend this account to Mandarin animate nouns, proposing that they are encoded in the mental lexicon with both a count sense and a mass sense. To adjudicate between the accounts, we conducted four experiments that were designed to assess the interpretation assigned to animate nouns by Mandarin-speaking children and adults. The experimental conditions manipulated both the syntactic structures of the sentences and the non-linguistic contexts in which those sentences were presented. The experimental findings support our proposal that both mass and count interpretations of animate nouns are available to children and adults when sentences are presented in contexts that are congruent with these interpretations. The findings also suggest that syntactic structure is an even more critical factor in determining the interpretation that is assigned to animate nouns in Mandarin.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童和成人普通话中对有生命名词的解释:从通用研磨机到句法结构
使用有生命的名词来指称世界上的实体涉及本体论、认知和语言的复杂互动。本研究以汉语普通话为载体,对使用有生命的名词的两种说法进行了评估,以检验这两种相互竞争的说法之间的差异。其中一种说法由 Cheng 等人(2008.通用研磨机有多通用?见 Marjo van Koppen & Bert Botma(编),《荷兰的语言学》,50-62 页。阿姆斯特丹和费城:John Benjamins)。这些研究者认为,由于词汇阻塞效应,计数解释是普通话有生命名词的基本解释。要获得另一种大规模解释,需要某种语用强制。第二种说法是由 Pelletier 根据 English(1975.非星形参照:Some preliminaries.Philosophia 5(4).451-465; 2012.词法名词既是 +MASS 也是 +COUNT,但它们既不是 +MASS 也不是 +COUNT。见 Diane Massam(编),《跨语言的计数与质量》,9-26。牛津大学出版社):牛津大学出版社)。我们将这一说法扩展到普通话的有生命名词,提出它们在心理词典中同时具有计数义和质量义。为了评判这两种说法,我们进行了四项实验,旨在评估讲普通话的儿童和成人对有生命名词的解释。实验条件既操纵了句子的句法结构,也操纵了呈现这些句子的非语言语境。实验结果支持了我们的建议,即当句子呈现的语境与有生命名词的质量和数量解释相一致时,儿童和成人都可以对这些解释进行解释。实验结果还表明,句法结构在决定普通话中对有生命名词的解释方面是一个更为关键的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Linguistics
Linguistics Multiple-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Linguistics publishes articles in the traditional subdisciplines of linguistics as well as in neighboring disciplines insofar as these are deemed to be of interest to linguists and other students of natural language. This includes grammar, both functional and formal, with a focus on morphology, syntax, and semantics, pragmatics and discourse, phonetics and phonology, psycholinguistics, and sociolinguistics. The focus may be on one or several languages, but studies with a wide crosslinguistic (typological) coverage are also welcome. The perspective may be synchronic or diachronic. Linguistics also publishes up to two special issues a year in these areas, for which it welcomes proposals.
期刊最新文献
On analysing fragments: the case of No? On analysing fragments: the case of No? Areal and phylogenetic dimensions of word order variation in Indo-European languages A register approach to negative concord versus negative polarity items in English Competing constructions in Kaqchikel focus contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1