1. bookVolume 5 (2019): Issue 1 (September 2019)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
16 Apr 2015
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

The interpretation of singular nouns in the scope of an event-distributive quantifier

Published Online: 08 Nov 2019
Page range: 1 - 9
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
16 Apr 2015
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English

Singular nouns in the scope of a distributive operator have been shown to be treated as conceptually plural (Patson and Warren, 2010). The source of this conceptual plurality is not fully clear. In particular, it is not known whether the concept of plurality associated with a singular noun originates from distributing over multiple objects or multiple events. In the present experiment, iterative expressions (distribution over events) were contrasted with collective and distributive sentences using a Stroop-like interference technique (Berent, Pinker, Tzelgov, Bibi, and Goldfarb, 2005; Patson and Warren, 2010). A trend in the data suggests that event distributivity does not elicit a plural interpretation of a grammatically singular noun, however the results were not statistically significant. Possible causes of the non-significant results are discussed.

Keywords

Berent, I., Pinker, S., Tzelgov, J., Bibi, U., and Goldfarb, L. (2005). Computation of semantic number from morphological information. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 342-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.05.00210.1016/j.jml.2005.05.002Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Bock, K., Butterfield, S., Cutler, A., Cutting, J. C., Eberhard, K. M., and Humphreys, K. R. (2006). Number agreement in British and American English: Disagreeing to agree collectively. Language, 82(1), 64-113.Search in Google Scholar

Cable, S. (2014). Distributive numerals and distance distributivity in Tlingit (and beyond). Language, 90(3), 562-606.Search in Google Scholar

Champollion, L. (2010). Parts of a whole. Citeseer.Search in Google Scholar

Champollion, L. (2015). Distributivity, collectivity and cumulativity. Wiley’s Companion to Semantics. Retrieved from http://lingbuzz.auf.net/lingbuzz/002133/current.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

Champollion, L. (2016). Linking the collective-distributive opposition and the telic-atelic opposition. Proceedings of the 46th North East Linguistic Society (NELS 46), 1, 171-184.Search in Google Scholar

Corbett, G. G. (2000). Number (1st edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dowty, D. R. (1987). Collective predicates, distributive predicates, and “all.” In F. Marshall (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1986 Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL) (pp. 97-116). Columbus: Ohio State University.Search in Google Scholar

Durie, M. (1986). The grammaticization of number as a verbal category. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 12, 355. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v12i0.187610.3765/bls.v12i0.1876Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Fischler, I., Bloom, P. A., Childers, D. G., Roucos, S. E., and Perry, N. W. (1983). Brain potentials related to stages of sentence verification. Psychophysiology, 20(4), 400-409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1983.tb00920.x10.1111/j.1469-8986.1983.tb00920.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

Hofherr, P. C. (2010). Verbal plurality and event plurality. Course Material, Summer School on Linguistic Typology, Leipzig.Search in Google Scholar

Humphreys, K. R. and Bock, K. (2005). Notional number agreement in English. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12(4), 689-695.Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1990). Four thousand ships passed through the lock: Object-induced measure functions on events. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13(5), 487-520. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0062729110.1007/BF00627291Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Landman, F. (2000). Events and plurality: The Jerusalem lectures. Retrieved from https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780792365693Search in Google Scholar

Lüdtke, J., Friedrich, C. K., De Filippis, M., and Kaup, B. (2008). Event-related potential correlates of negation in a sentence-picture verification paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(8), 1355-1370. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20093Search in Google Scholar

MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2), 163-203.Search in Google Scholar

Oh, S.-R. (2005). Plurality markers across languages. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Connecticut.Search in Google Scholar

Patson, N. D. and Warren, T. (2010). Evidence for distributivity effects in comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(3), 782-789. https://doi.org/10.1037/a001878310.1037/a0018783Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Scha, R. J. H. (1984). Distributive, collective and cumulative quantification. In J. Groenendijk, T. M. V. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (Eds.), Truth, Interpretation and Information Selected Papers from the Third Amsterdam Colloquium (Reprint 2012) (pp. 131-158). Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110867602.13110.1515/9783110867602.131Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Sternefeld, W. (1998). Reciprocity and cumulative predication. Natural Language Semantics, 6(3), 303-337.Search in Google Scholar

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643.Search in Google Scholar

Tunstall, S. L. (1998). The interpretation of quantifiers: Semantics and processing. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Search in Google Scholar

Ussery, C. (1998). Processing plural DPs: Collective, cumulative, and distributive interpretations. Amherst.: University of Massachusetts. Retrieved from https://apps.carleton.edu/people/cussery/assets/Processing_Plural_DPs.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

Winter, Y. (2000). Distributivity and dependency. Natural Language Semantics, 8(1), 27-69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100831371510310.1023/A:1008313715103Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo