如果你必须分割:无额外时间原则的证据。

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Charles Clifton, Lyn Frazier
{"title":"如果你必须分割:无额外时间原则的证据。","authors":"Charles Clifton,&nbsp;Lyn Frazier","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Plural phrases are open to many interpretations in English, where cumulative interpretations of noun and verb phrases are possible without any disambiguating morphology. A sentence like <i>Every week, the high school kids went to the movies or the ballgame</i> might involve quantifying over multiple occurrences of a single scenario, in which subsets of the kids do different things, or it might involve quantifying over distinct scenarios, in which all of the kids do one thing or all of them do the other. In the present work and related earlier work (Harris et al., 2013), we pursue the No Extra Times principle that favors interpretations where a phrase is construed as describing a single event taking place during a given time period. In two written interpretation studies, we found that participants more often interpret indeterminate sentences with disjunctive predicates by partitioning the set of individuals rather than partitioning the predicate to denote distinct scenarios or times. We conclude by offering some speculations about why partitioning the eventuality denoted by the verb phrase into multiple times is more costly than partitioning the entities denoted by its subject noun phrase into multiple sets.</p>","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":"50 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partition if You Must: Evidence for a No Extra Times Principle.\",\"authors\":\"Charles Clifton,&nbsp;Lyn Frazier\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Plural phrases are open to many interpretations in English, where cumulative interpretations of noun and verb phrases are possible without any disambiguating morphology. A sentence like <i>Every week, the high school kids went to the movies or the ballgame</i> might involve quantifying over multiple occurrences of a single scenario, in which subsets of the kids do different things, or it might involve quantifying over distinct scenarios, in which all of the kids do one thing or all of them do the other. In the present work and related earlier work (Harris et al., 2013), we pursue the No Extra Times principle that favors interpretations where a phrase is construed as describing a single event taking place during a given time period. In two written interpretation studies, we found that participants more often interpret indeterminate sentences with disjunctive predicates by partitioning the set of individuals rather than partitioning the predicate to denote distinct scenarios or times. We conclude by offering some speculations about why partitioning the eventuality denoted by the verb phrase into multiple times is more costly than partitioning the entities denoted by its subject noun phrase into multiple sets.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discourse Processes\",\"volume\":\"50 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse Processes","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2013.850604","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

复数短语在英语中有多种解释,其中名词和动词短语的累积解释可能没有任何消除歧义的形态。像这样的句子,每个星期,高中生去看电影或球赛可能涉及到对一个场景的多次出现进行量化,在这个场景中,孩子们的子集做不同的事情,或者它可能涉及到对不同的场景进行量化,在这个场景中,所有的孩子都做一件事,或者所有的孩子都做另一件事。在目前的工作和相关的早期工作中(Harris et al., 2013),我们追求无额外时间原则,该原则支持将短语解释为描述在给定时间段内发生的单个事件的解释。在两项书面解释研究中,我们发现参与者更多地通过划分个体集来解释带有析取谓词的不确定句子,而不是通过划分谓词来表示不同的场景或时间。最后,我们提出了一些推测,为什么将动词短语表示的可能性划分为多个次数比将其主语短语表示的实体划分为多个集合更昂贵。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Partition if You Must: Evidence for a No Extra Times Principle.

Plural phrases are open to many interpretations in English, where cumulative interpretations of noun and verb phrases are possible without any disambiguating morphology. A sentence like Every week, the high school kids went to the movies or the ballgame might involve quantifying over multiple occurrences of a single scenario, in which subsets of the kids do different things, or it might involve quantifying over distinct scenarios, in which all of the kids do one thing or all of them do the other. In the present work and related earlier work (Harris et al., 2013), we pursue the No Extra Times principle that favors interpretations where a phrase is construed as describing a single event taking place during a given time period. In two written interpretation studies, we found that participants more often interpret indeterminate sentences with disjunctive predicates by partitioning the set of individuals rather than partitioning the predicate to denote distinct scenarios or times. We conclude by offering some speculations about why partitioning the eventuality denoted by the verb phrase into multiple times is more costly than partitioning the entities denoted by its subject noun phrase into multiple sets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Discourse Processes is a multidisciplinary journal providing a forum for cross-fertilization of ideas from diverse disciplines sharing a common interest in discourse--prose comprehension and recall, dialogue analysis, text grammar construction, computer simulation of natural language, cross-cultural comparisons of communicative competence, or related topics. The problems posed by multisentence contexts and the methods required to investigate them, although not always unique to discourse, are sufficiently distinct so as to require an organized mode of scientific interaction made possible through the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信