Cognitive Science 39 (7):1504-1536 (2015)
AbstractQuantifier expressions like “many” and “at least” are part of a rich repository of words in language representing magnitude information. The role of numerical processing in comprehending quantifiers was studied in a semantic truth value judgment task, asking adults to quickly verify sentences about visual displays using numerical or proportional quantifiers. The visual displays were composed of systematically varied proportions of yellow and blue circles. The results demonstrated that numerical estimation and numerical reference information are fundamental in encoding the meaning of quantifiers in terms of response times and acceptability judgments. However, a difference emerges in the comparison strategies when a fixed external reference numerosity is used for numerical quantifiers, whereas an internal numerical criterion is invoked for proportional quantifiers. Moreover, for both quantifier types, quantifier semantics and its polarity biased the response direction. Overall, our results indicate that quantifier comprehension involves core numerical and lexical semantic properties, demonstrating integrated processing of language and numbers
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language.John Barwise & Robin Cooper - 1981 - Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (2):159--219.
Exact and Approximate Arithmetic in an Amazonian Indigene Group.Pierre Pica, Cathy Lemer, Véronique Izard & Stanislas Dehaene - 2004 - Science 306 (5695):499-503.
Language and Problems of Knowledge the Managua Lectures.Noam Chomsky - 1987 - MIT Press.
Core Systems of Number.Stanislas Dehaene, Elizabeth Spelke & Lisa Feigenson - 2004 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8 (7):307-314.
Citations of this work
If so Many Are “Few,” How Few Are “Many”?Stefan Heim, Corey T. McMillan, Robin Clark, Stephanie Golob, Nam E. Min, Christopher Olm, John Powers & Murray Grossman - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
“Few” or “Many”? An Adaptation Level Theory Account for Flexibility in Quantifier Processing.Stefan Heim, Natalja Peiseler & Natalia Bekemeier - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
A Taxonomy Proposal for Types of Interactions of Language and Place-Value Processing in Multi-Digit Numbers.Julia Bahnmueller, Hans-Christoph Nuerk & Korbinian Moeller - 2018 - Frontiers in Psychology 9.
So Many Are “Few,” but so Few Are Also “Few” – Reduced Semantic Flexibility in bvFTD Patients.Stefan Heim, Corey T. McMillan, Christopher Olm & Murray Grossman - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
Similar books and articles
Is It Logical to Count on Quantifiers? Dissociable Neural Networks Underlying Numerical and Logical Quantifiers.V. Troiani, J. Peelle, R. Clark & M. Grossman - 2009 - Neuropsychologia 47 (1):104--111.
Improving Methodology of Quantifier Comprehension Experiments.Jakub Szymanik & Marcin Zajenkowski - 2009 - Neuropsychologia 47 (12):2682--2683.
Quantifiers and Working Memory.Jakub Szymanik & Marcin Zajenkowski - 2010 - In Maria Aloni & Katrin Schulz (eds.), Amsterdam Colloquium 2009, LNAI 6042. Springer.
On the Derivability of Instantiation Properties.Harvey Friedman - 1977 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 42 (4):506-514.
Granularity and Scalar Implicature in Numerical Expressions.Chris Cummins, Uli Sauerland & Stephanie Solt - 2012 - Linguistics and Philosophy 35 (2):135-169.
The Numerical Syllogism and Existential Presupposition.Wallace A. Murphree - 1997 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 38 (1):49-64.
Automatic Numerical Processing is Based on an Abstract Representation.Dana Ganor-Stern - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):337-338.
The Development of “Most” Comprehension and Its Potential Dependence on Counting Ability in Preschoolers.Len Taing & Jeffrey Lidz - unknown