Scalar quantifiers: Logic, acquisition, and processing
until further notice
SourceLanguage and Cognitive Processes, 25, 1, (2009), pp. 130-148
Article / Letter to editor
Display more detailsDisplay less details
SW OZ DCC CO
SW OZ NICI CO
Language and Cognitive Processes
SubjectDI-BCB_DCC_Theme 1: Language and Communication; Psycholinguistics
Superlative quantifiers (“at least 3”, “at most 3”) and comparative quantifiers (“more than 2”, “fewer than 4”) are traditionally taken to be interdefinable: the received view is that “at least n” and “at most n” are equivalent to “more than n–1” and “fewer than n+1”, respectively. Notwithstanding the prima facie plausibility of this claim, Geurts and Nouwen (2007) argue that superlative quantifiers have essentially richer meanings than comparative ones. Geurts and Nouwen’s theory makes three kinds of predictions that can be tested by experimental means. First, it predicts that superlative and comparative quantifiers should give rise to different patterns of reasoning. Secondly, it leads us to expect that children will master comparative quantifiers before superlative ones. Thirdly, superlative quantifiers should be harder to process than comparative ones. We present three experiments that confirm these predictions.
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.