Suppr超能文献

谈谈“一些”和“所有”:是什么决定了数量表达词的用法?

Talking about SOME and ALL: What determines the usage of quantity-denoting expressions?

作者信息

Huang Yi Ting, Arnold Jennifer E

机构信息

Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland College Park.

Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

出版信息

Discourse Process. 2018;55(8):686-703. doi: 10.1080/0163853X.2017.1317170. Epub 2017 May 25.

Abstract

Reference production is often studied through single dimensions of contrast (e.g., "" when there are one or two glasses of varying height). Yet real-world communication is rarely so simple, raising questions about the factors guiding more complex referents. The current study examines decisions to mention set relations (e.g., using quantity-denoting expressions like "" to refer to 2-out-of-5 houses) versus object categories only (e.g., using bare plurals like ""). Two experiments used vignettes to vary discourse focus on objects (prominent vs. non-prominent) and scenes to vary the set type described (subset vs. total set). Speakers were more likely to communicate set relations of prominent objects, particularly when they elicited high name agreement in the case of total sets. Speakers' use of quantity-denoting expressions also increased listeners' sensitivity to set relations in an object-matching task. This suggests that unlike simpler forms of modification that often decrease with greater focus, quantity-denoting expressions provide additional information about the set relations of prominent referents.

摘要

参考物的呈现通常是通过单一维度的对比来研究的(例如,当有一两杯高度不同的杯子时)。然而,现实世界中的交流很少如此简单,这就引发了关于引导更复杂指称物的因素的问题。当前的研究考察了提及集合关系(例如,使用像“五分之二的房子”这样表示数量的表达方式来指代五所房子中的两所)与仅提及对象类别(例如,使用像“房子”这样的裸复数形式)的决策。两项实验使用了小插曲来改变对话对对象的关注程度(突出与不突出),并使用场景来改变所描述的集合类型(子集与全集)。说话者更有可能传达突出对象的集合关系,特别是当它们在全集的情况下引发较高的名称一致性时。在对象匹配任务中,说话者使用表示数量的表达方式也提高了听众对集合关系的敏感度。这表明,与通常随着关注度提高而减少的更简单的修饰形式不同,表示数量的表达方式提供了关于突出指称物的集合关系的额外信息。

相似文献

1
Talking about SOME and ALL: What determines the usage of quantity-denoting expressions?
Discourse Process. 2018;55(8):686-703. doi: 10.1080/0163853X.2017.1317170. Epub 2017 May 25.
2
Referential Form and Memory for the Discourse History.
Cogn Sci. 2021 Apr;45(4):e12964. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12964.
3
How Cognitive Load Influences Speakers' Choice of Referring Expressions.
Cogn Sci. 2015 Aug;39(6):1396-418. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12205. Epub 2014 Dec 4.
4
Cognitive Modeling of Individual Variation in Reference Production and Comprehension.
Front Psychol. 2016 Apr 7;7:506. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00506. eCollection 2016.
5
Processing bare quantifiers in discourse.
Brain Res. 2007 May 18;1146:199-209. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.09.060. Epub 2006 Oct 30.
6
Covariation and quantifier polarity: what determines causal attribution in vignettes?
Cognition. 2006 Feb;99(1):35-51. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.12.004. Epub 2005 Mar 4.
7
Stored object knowledge and the production of referring expressions: the case of color typicality.
Front Psychol. 2015 Jul 6;6:935. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00935. eCollection 2015.
8
Looking at a contrast object before speaking boosts referential informativeness, but is not essential.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2017 Jul;178:87-99. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.06.001. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
9
This shoe, that tiger: Semantic properties reflecting manual affordances of the referent modulate demonstrative use.
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 7;14(1):e0210333. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210333. eCollection 2019.
10
Referential Choices in a Collaborative Storytelling Task: Discourse Stages and Referential Complexity Matter.
Front Psychol. 2018 Feb 20;9:176. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00176. eCollection 2018.

引用本文的文献

1
Some inferences still take time: Prosody, predictability, and the speed of scalar implicatures.
Cogn Psychol. 2018 May;102:105-126. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.01.004. Epub 2018 Mar 6.

本文引用的文献

1
Some inferences still take time: Prosody, predictability, and the speed of scalar implicatures.
Cogn Psychol. 2018 May;102:105-126. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.01.004. Epub 2018 Mar 6.
2
Processing scalar implicature: a constraint-based approach.
Cogn Sci. 2015 May;39(4):667-710. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12171. Epub 2014 Sep 30.
3
The P-chain: relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Dec 9;369(1634):20120394. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0394. Print 2014.
4
An integrated theory of language production and comprehension.
Behav Brain Sci. 2013 Aug;36(4):329-47. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X12001495. Epub 2013 Jun 24.
5
How language production shapes language form and comprehension.
Front Psychol. 2013 Apr 26;4:226. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226. eCollection 2013.
6
Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 May 14;110(20):8051-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1216438110. Epub 2013 May 1.
7
Taking the epistemic step: toward a model of on-line access to conversational implicatures.
Cognition. 2013 Mar;126(3):423-40. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.012. Epub 2013 Jan 4.
8
Predicting language: MEG evidence for lexical preactivation.
Brain Lang. 2013 Oct;127(1):55-64. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.08.004. Epub 2012 Oct 2.
10
Before the N400: effects of lexical-semantic violations in visual cortex.
Brain Lang. 2011 Jul;118(1-2):23-8. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.02.006. Epub 2011 Mar 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验