We used COVID-related health messages to investigate the incremental processing of expressions such as you, we and people in generic contexts, to further our understanding of how these kinds of expressions are processed in real-time and to explore whether the ease of comprehending public health messages related to the COVID pandemic is influenced by type of referring expression. Results from a self-paced reading study point to an increased processing load in messages with the non-indexical form people (relative to we and you), which we suggest is separable from effects of word length and frequency. We interpret this as preliminary support for the Indexicality Hypothesis, which posits that expressions which can in principle receive indexical interpretations are easier to process than non-indexicals, and also emphasize the need for further work on these kinds of questions.
{"title":"Real-time processing of indexical and generic expressions: Insights from, and implications for, COVID-related public health messages","authors":"E. Kaiser, Jesse Storbeck","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5398","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5398","url":null,"abstract":"We used COVID-related health messages to investigate the incremental processing of expressions such as you, we and people in generic contexts, to further our understanding of how these kinds of expressions are processed in real-time and to explore whether the ease of comprehending public health messages related to the COVID pandemic is influenced by type of referring expression. Results from a self-paced reading study point to an increased processing load in messages with the non-indexical form people (relative to we and you), which we suggest is separable from effects of word length and frequency. We interpret this as preliminary support for the Indexicality Hypothesis, which posits that expressions which can in principle receive indexical interpretations are easier to process than non-indexicals, and also emphasize the need for further work on these kinds of questions.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116963956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
To what extent can we tease apart semantic representations and processes from other influences on processing such as probabilistic prediction? In this paper I detail two experiments testing the hypothesis that there are semantic complexity in the lexical representations of result verbs that influences reaction times above and beyond probabilistic distributions. This is done by replicating a self-paced reading study from Levinson & Brennan (2016) while also modelling lexical surprisal. Experiment 1 replicates the original result, but only in experiment 2 using the maze task does the effect emerge beyond surprisals. The more focal maze task results suggest that processing costs associated with bieventive result verbs should be accounted for by grammatical factors, in addition to probabilistic prediction.
{"title":"Beyond Surprising: English Event Structure in the Maze","authors":"Lisa Levinson","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5384","url":null,"abstract":"To what extent can we tease apart semantic representations and processes from other influences on processing such as probabilistic prediction? In this paper I detail two experiments testing the hypothesis that there are semantic complexity in the lexical representations of result verbs that influences reaction times above and beyond probabilistic distributions. This is done by replicating a self-paced reading study from Levinson & Brennan (2016) while also modelling lexical surprisal. Experiment 1 replicates the original result, but only in experiment 2 using the maze task does the effect emerge beyond surprisals. The more focal maze task results suggest that processing costs associated with bieventive result verbs should be accounted for by grammatical factors, in addition to probabilistic prediction.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129189344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Every-negation utterances (e.g., Every vote doesn’t count) are ambiguous between a surface scope interpretation (e.g., No vote counts) and an inverse scope interpretation (e.g., Not all votes count). Investigations into the interpretation of these utterances have found variation: child and adult interpretations diverge (e.g., Musolino 1999) and adult interpretations of specific constructions show considerable disagreement (Carden 1973, Heringer 1970, Attali et al. 2021). Can we concretely identify factors to explain some of this variation and predict tendencies in individual interpretations? Here we show that a type of expectation about the world (which we call a high positive expectation), which can surface in the linguistic contexts of every-negation utterances, predicts experimental preferences for the inverse scope interpretation of different every-negation utterances. These findings suggest that (1) world knowledge, as set up in a linguistic context, helps to effectively reduce the ambiguity of potentiallyambiguous utterances for listeners, and (2) given that high positive expectations are a kind of affirmative context, negation use is felicitous in affirmative contexts (e.g., Wason 1961).
所有否定的话语(例如，每次投票都不算数)在表面范围解释(例如，不投票计数)和反向范围解释(例如，并非所有投票都计数)之间是模棱两可的。对这些话语解释的调查发现了差异:儿童和成人的解释存在分歧(例如，Musolino 1999)，成人对特定结构的解释也存在相当大的分歧(Carden 1973, Heringer 1970, Attali et al. 2021)。我们能否具体地确定一些因素来解释这种变化，并预测个人解释的趋势?在这里，我们展示了一种关于世界的期望(我们称之为高积极期望)，它可以在每一否定话语的语言语境中出现，预测了不同的每一否定话语的逆范围解释的实验偏好。这些发现表明:(1)建立在语言语境中的世界知识有助于有效地减少听者潜在的模棱两可话语的模糊性;(2)鉴于高积极期望是一种肯定语境，在肯定语境中使用否定是恰当的(例如，Wason 1961)。
{"title":"Corpus evidence for the role of world knowledge in ambiguity reduction: Using high positive expectations to inform quantifier scope","authors":"Noa Attali, Lisa Pearl, Gregory Scontras","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5376","url":null,"abstract":"Every-negation utterances (e.g., Every vote doesn’t count) are ambiguous between a surface scope interpretation (e.g., No vote counts) and an inverse scope interpretation (e.g., Not all votes count). Investigations into the interpretation of these utterances have found variation: child and adult interpretations diverge (e.g., Musolino 1999) and adult interpretations of specific constructions show considerable disagreement (Carden 1973, Heringer 1970, Attali et al. 2021). Can we concretely identify factors to explain some of this variation and predict tendencies in individual interpretations? Here we show that a type of expectation about the world (which we call a high positive expectation), which can surface in the linguistic contexts of every-negation utterances, predicts experimental preferences for the inverse scope interpretation of different every-negation utterances. These findings suggest that (1) world knowledge, as set up in a linguistic context, helps to effectively reduce the ambiguity of potentiallyambiguous utterances for listeners, and (2) given that high positive expectations are a kind of affirmative context, negation use is felicitous in affirmative contexts (e.g., Wason 1961).","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126881298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The present work is a systematic review on the acquisition of quantity implicatures in typically developing children. The references were selected through the PRISMA method. The criteria for eligibility were that the articles should be peer-reviewed, published articles written in English, containing empirical data on the comprehension of quantity implicatures in first language acquisition during typical development. The aim of this review is three-fold. First, to provide a picture of what empirical data tells us about the acquisition of quantity implicatures, based on both lexical and ad-hoc scales, potentially contributing to theoretical accounts of the phenomenon. Second, to analyze the methodologies that have been used to test children and their adequacy. And lastly to evaluate whether or not systematic review is an accurate analysis method for this type of varied and often complicated data. The results suggest that children improve in implicature derivation with age, especially with lexical scales, and that action-based tasks not based on meta-linguistic evaluations might be better suited to test these inferences, especially as opposed to Truth Value Judgment tasks. The fact that the systematic analysis confirms previously individuated trends in the acquisition of implicatures confirms that this is in fact a useful methodology to analyze the data, even with its limitations.
{"title":"The investigation of quantity implicatures during typical development: a systematic review","authors":"Anna Teresa Porrini, L. Surian","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5361","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5361","url":null,"abstract":"The present work is a systematic review on the acquisition of quantity implicatures in typically developing children. The references were selected through the PRISMA method. The criteria for eligibility were that the articles should be peer-reviewed, published articles written in English, containing empirical data on the comprehension of quantity implicatures in first language acquisition during typical development. The aim of this review is three-fold. First, to provide a picture of what empirical data tells us about the acquisition of quantity implicatures, based on both lexical and ad-hoc scales, potentially contributing to theoretical accounts of the phenomenon. Second, to analyze the methodologies that have been used to test children and their adequacy. And lastly to evaluate whether or not systematic review is an accurate analysis method for this type of varied and often complicated data. The results suggest that children improve in implicature derivation with age, especially with lexical scales, and that action-based tasks not based on meta-linguistic evaluations might be better suited to test these inferences, especially as opposed to Truth Value Judgment tasks. The fact that the systematic analysis confirms previously individuated trends in the acquisition of implicatures confirms that this is in fact a useful methodology to analyze the data, even with its limitations.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"95 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127670434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From an utterance of Mary ate some of the deep dish, hearers frequently infer that Mary didn’t eat all of the deep dish. Similarly, an utterance of The movie is good might lead hearers to conclude that the movie isn’t excellent. These inferences are instances of scalar implicature (SI). The standard assumption is that SI arises via hearers’ reasoning about alternative utterances that the speaker could have said, but did not. In particular, hearers are taken to consider stronger alternatives such as all (or Mary ate all of the deep dish) and excellent (or The movie is excellent) and derive their negation. In this study, we investigate the psycholinguistic reflexes of this inferential process. We use semantic priming with lexical decision to test whether lexical alternatives such as all and excellent are retrieved and activated in the processing of SI-triggering sentences. The results of our experiments indeed suggest that alternatives play a role in the processing of SI, though a number of empirical puzzles remain.
从玛丽吃了一些深菜的话语中，听众经常推断玛丽没有吃完所有的深菜。同样，一句“电影很好”可能会让听者得出电影并不优秀的结论。这些推论是标量蕴涵(SI)的实例。标准的假设是，SI是通过听者对说话人本可以说但没有说的话的推理而产生的。特别是，听众被引导去考虑更强的替代词，如all(或Mary吃光了所有的深盘)和excellent(或the movie is excellent)，并得出它们的否定。在本研究中，我们探讨了这一推理过程的心理语言反射。我们使用语义启动和词汇决策来测试词汇替代如all和excellent是否在si触发句的处理中被检索和激活。我们的实验结果确实表明，选择在SI的处理中发挥了作用，尽管仍然存在一些经验上的困惑。
{"title":"Tracking the activation of scalar alternatives with semantic priming","authors":"Eszter Ronai, M. Xiang","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5371","url":null,"abstract":"From an utterance of Mary ate some of the deep dish, hearers frequently infer that Mary didn’t eat all of the deep dish. Similarly, an utterance of The movie is good might lead hearers to conclude that the movie isn’t excellent. These inferences are instances of scalar implicature (SI). The standard assumption is that SI arises via hearers’ reasoning about alternative utterances that the speaker could have said, but did not. In particular, hearers are taken to consider stronger alternatives such as all (or Mary ate all of the deep dish) and excellent (or The movie is excellent) and derive their negation. In this study, we investigate the psycholinguistic reflexes of this inferential process. We use semantic priming with lexical decision to test whether lexical alternatives such as all and excellent are retrieved and activated in the processing of SI-triggering sentences. The results of our experiments indeed suggest that alternatives play a role in the processing of SI, though a number of empirical puzzles remain.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127672936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
G. Winterstein, Ghyslain Cantin-Savoie, Samuel Laperle, Josiane Van Dorpe, Nora Villeneuve
The aim of this study is to investigate how human speakers and computational language models process (i) the informational content and (ii) the discourse orientation of natural language sentences. These two dimensions of meaning have received little attention outside theoretical literature, especially in the computational linguistics domain. To help fill this void, we present the results of four experiments that exploit the specific semantics of two French adverbs, namely presque (≃ ’almost’) and à peine (≃ ’barely’), which put these two dimensions of meaning at odds. Each experiment focuses on one kind of population (humans or language models), and one kind of meaning (informational content or discourse orientation). Our results show that humans are indeed sensitive to informational content and discourse direction, as assumed in the theoretical literature. Language models exhibit a less transparent behavior. Their performances in dealing with the semantics of presque appear in line with predictions based on the way these models are trained, but this does not extend to à peine.
{"title":"Informational content vs. discourse orientation: experimental and computational perspectives","authors":"G. Winterstein, Ghyslain Cantin-Savoie, Samuel Laperle, Josiane Van Dorpe, Nora Villeneuve","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5389","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study is to investigate how human speakers and computational language models process (i) the informational content and (ii) the discourse orientation of natural language sentences. These two dimensions of meaning have received little attention outside theoretical literature, especially in the computational linguistics domain. To help fill this void, we present the results of four experiments that exploit the specific semantics of two French adverbs, namely presque (≃ ’almost’) and à peine (≃ ’barely’), which put these two dimensions of meaning at odds. Each experiment focuses on one kind of population (humans or language models), and one kind of meaning (informational content or discourse orientation). Our results show that humans are indeed sensitive to informational content and discourse direction, as assumed in the theoretical literature. Language models exhibit a less transparent behavior. Their performances in dealing with the semantics of presque appear in line with predictions based on the way these models are trained, but this does not extend to à peine.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128728752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper presents three auditory rating experiments on the rise-fall-rise contour (RFR). Experiment 1 provides experimental evidence that the RFR makes disagreeing with a prior statement more natural than neutral intonation would. Additionally, the data show that the RFR exhibits a valence asymmetry, noted by Göbel (2019): the amelioration of a disagreement is greater when the RFR is used in a positive reply to a negative statement than in a negative reply to a positive statement. Experiments 2 and 3 investigate factors contributing to this asymmetry, showing that it disappears in replies to questions and is weakened when the reply contains an additive particle. Based on these results, we argue that the RFR has a scalar meaning, following Göbel (2019), with the relevant scale being contextually determined and resulting in an ambiguity resembling the Focus-particle at least.
{"title":"On a concessive reading of the rise-fall-rise contour: contextual and semantic factors","authors":"Alexander Göbel, Michael Wagner","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5395","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents three auditory rating experiments on the rise-fall-rise contour (RFR). Experiment 1 provides experimental evidence that the RFR makes disagreeing with a prior statement more natural than neutral intonation would. Additionally, the data show that the RFR exhibits a valence asymmetry, noted by Göbel (2019): the amelioration of a disagreement is greater when the RFR is used in a positive reply to a negative statement than in a negative reply to a positive statement. Experiments 2 and 3 investigate factors contributing to this asymmetry, showing that it disappears in replies to questions and is weakened when the reply contains an additive particle. Based on these results, we argue that the RFR has a scalar meaning, following Göbel (2019), with the relevant scale being contextually determined and resulting in an ambiguity resembling the Focus-particle at least.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130994749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper addresses the question to what extent global and local accommodation should be viewed as sharing the same underlying mechanism or whether they are distinct processes that only happen to share the same label. We present offline rating data and response times from a mouse-tracking experiment that directly compared global and local accommodation for five different triggers. The results show that globally accommodating a presupposition led to a larger decrease in acceptance than locally accommodating, and that response times for local accommodation were overall faster. While we take the results to be inconclusive with regard to the question about the underlying mechanism, we conjecture that the contexts tested here were more favorable for local accommodation, and that hence investigating how different contexts affect the relative ease of accommodation type is a promising avenue for future research.
{"title":"Comparing Global and Local Accommodation: Rating and Response Time Data","authors":"Alexander Göbel, F. Schwarz","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5400","url":null,"abstract":"This paper addresses the question to what extent global and local accommodation should be viewed as sharing the same underlying mechanism or whether they are distinct processes that only happen to share the same label. We present offline rating data and response times from a mouse-tracking experiment that directly compared global and local accommodation for five different triggers. The results show that globally accommodating a presupposition led to a larger decrease in acceptance than locally accommodating, and that response times for local accommodation were overall faster. While we take the results to be inconclusive with regard to the question about the underlying mechanism, we conjecture that the contexts tested here were more favorable for local accommodation, and that hence investigating how different contexts affect the relative ease of accommodation type is a promising avenue for future research.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123901087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Remus Gergel, Maike Puhl, Simon Dampfhofer, Edgar Onea
At the center of this paper is the question whether presuppositions are more likely to be gained or lost in the process of language change. We offer a new experimental method that aims at ascertaining the re-learning speed of potentially presuppositional items based on nonce words and which integrates certain factors of change such as social prestige in an artificial but clearly contextualized set-up. The meaning targeted is of a quantifier meaning ‘both’ with speakers of German and the initial results point to higher ease of losing rather than incorporating the presupposition, but with an interesting resilience after a critical questioning of presuppositional status.
{"title":"The rise and particularly fall of presuppositions: Evidence from duality in universals","authors":"Remus Gergel, Maike Puhl, Simon Dampfhofer, Edgar Onea","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5329","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5329","url":null,"abstract":"At the center of this paper is the question whether presuppositions are more likely to be gained or lost in the process of language change. We offer a new experimental method that aims at ascertaining the re-learning speed of potentially presuppositional items based on nonce words and which integrates certain factors of change such as social prestige in an artificial but clearly contextualized set-up. The meaning targeted is of a quantifier meaning ‘both’ with speakers of German and the initial results point to higher ease of losing rather than incorporating the presupposition, but with an interesting resilience after a critical questioning of presuppositional status.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114251274","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper reports two psycholinguistic experiments on quantity comparatives and superlatives that are potentially ambiguous between cardinal and proportional readings. By using statements about COVID cases and vaccination numbers as a naturalistic context with real-world relevance, this work furthers our understanding of what happens in linguistic environments where multiple measure functions are available – what modulates the choice between them? The results provide new evidence that comparatives and superlatives can refer to scales ranging over degrees of proportion, in addition to degrees of cardinality. Furthermore, this experimental evidence points to a preference for cardinal interpretations, but also show that this is not rigid and can be weakened in favor of proportional readings by semantic factors – including considerations potentially related to stage- vs. individual-level differences – and by certain linguistic forms.
{"title":"Proportions vs. cardinalities: Comparative ambiguities and the COVID pandemic","authors":"E. Kaiser","doi":"10.3765/elm.2.5394","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3765/elm.2.5394","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports two psycholinguistic experiments on quantity comparatives and superlatives that are potentially ambiguous between cardinal and proportional readings. By using statements about COVID cases and vaccination numbers as a naturalistic context with real-world relevance, this work furthers our understanding of what happens in linguistic environments where multiple measure functions are available – what modulates the choice between them? The results provide new evidence that comparatives and superlatives can refer to scales ranging over degrees of proportion, in addition to degrees of cardinality. Furthermore, this experimental evidence points to a preference for cardinal interpretations, but also show that this is not rigid and can be weakened in favor of proportional readings by semantic factors – including considerations potentially related to stage- vs. individual-level differences – and by certain linguistic forms.","PeriodicalId":154565,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Linguistic Meaning","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127715805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：