Nicolae Andreea C, Petrenco Aliona, Tsilia Anastasia, Marty Paul
Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Germany.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Open Mind (Camb). 2024 Dec 15;8:1469-1485. doi: 10.1162/opmi_a_00175. eCollection 2024.
Most natural languages have more than one linguistic form available to express disjunction. One of these forms is often reported by native speakers to be more exclusive than the other(s) and, in recent years, it has been claimed that some languages may in fact have dedicated exclusive disjunctions. In this paper, we report on a series of experiments testing this claim across five languages of primary interest. Results show important variation in the rates of exclusive interpretation associated with the different particles used to express disjunction in these languages. Crucially, our findings show that, while complex disjunctions are usually perceived as more exclusive than their simple counterparts cross-linguistically, even the most exclusive disjunctions remain ambiguous between an inclusive and an exclusive interpretation. We discuss what factors may play a role in accounting for the gradient exclusivity effects observed in our data and how to model these effects in pragmatic and grammatical accounts of scalar implicatures.
大多数自然语言都有不止一种语言形式来表达析取关系。以英语为母语的人常说，其中一种形式比其他形式更具排他性，近年来，有人声称有些语言可能实际上拥有专门的排他性析取词。在本文中，我们报告了一系列针对五种主要语言进行的实验，以验证这一说法。结果表明，与这些语言中用于表达析取关系的不同词项相关的排他性解释率存在重要差异。至关重要的是，我们的研究结果表明，虽然跨语言来看复杂析取词通常比简单析取词被认为更具排他性，但即使是最具排他性的析取词在包含性解释和排他性解释之间仍存在歧义。我们讨论了哪些因素可能在解释我们数据中观察到的渐变排他性效应中起作用，以及如何在标量含意的语用和语法解释中对这些效应进行建模。
