Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers

Abstract

Learners of most languages are faced with the task of acquiring words to talk about number and quantity. Much is known about the order of acquisition of number words as well as the cognitive and perceptual systems and cultural practices that shape it. Substantially less is known about the acquisition of quantifiers. Here, we consider the extent to which systems and practices that support number word acquisition can be applied to quantifier acquisition and conclude that the two domains are largely distinct in this respect. Consequently, we hypothesize that the acquisition of quantifiers is constrained by a set of factors related to each quantifier's specific meaning. We investigate competence with the expressions for "all," "none," "some," "some…not," and "most" in 31 languages, representing 11 language types, by testing 768 5-y-old children and 536 adults. We found a cross-linguistically similar order of acquisition of quantifiers, explicable in terms of four factors relating to their meaning and use. In addition, exploratory analyses reveal that languageand learner-specific factors, such as negative concord and gender, are significant predictors of variation.language acquisition | universals | quantifiers | semantics | pragmatics N umber words and quantifiers are abstract words that denote properties of sets rather than individuals. Twoness and allness in "two/all of the black cats in the street" are not true of any individual cat, whereas blackness and catness are. Children display knowledge of number words and quantifiers around their second birthday, comparatively long after they have acquired concrete nouns (1, 2). As far as number words are concerned, a range of cognitive and perceptual systems supports their acquisition.These systems include an object-tracking system, which enables the precise representation of small quantities, and an analog magnitude system, which enables imprecise and approximate comparisons (1), SignificanceAlthough much research has been devoted to the acquisition of number words, relatively little is known about the acquisition of other expressions of quantity. We propose that the order of acquisition of quantifiers is related to features inherent to the meaning of each term. Four specific dimensions of the meaning and use of quantifiers are found to capture robust similarities in the order of acquisition of quantifiers in similar ways across 31 languages, representing 11 language types.

The neural development of pragmatic inference‐making in natural discourse

“…That is, sophisticated readers may make an effort to understand the utterance as part of an attempt to access the speaker's intention. The present experiment is therefore consistent with the idea that pragmatic inference-making emerges over the course of development (Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016;Pouscoulous et al, 2007). If correct, this explanation would raise an intriguing question: which abilities would be responsible for the emergence of such pragmatic inference-making in this task?…”

“…In contrast, premises in Implicated-Premise stories may not allow such a prediction. The present experiment is therefore consistent with the idea that pragmatic inference-making emerges over the course of development (Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016;Pouscoulous et al, 2007). We acknowledge that surprise may come into play with age and that it becomes part of the process in arriving at an alternative reading.…”

“…Given that pragmatic abilities are well known to develop from childhood to adolescence (e.g., Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016;Pouscoulous et al, 2007), this effect may be due to the fact that a conclusion in the Implicated-Premise condition can be considered a source for an enriching pragmatic inference. Given that pragmatic abilities are well known to develop from childhood to adolescence (e.g., Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016;Pouscoulous et al, 2007), this effect may be due to the fact that a conclusion in the Implicated-Premise condition can be considered a source for an enriching pragmatic inference.…”

“…In Experiment 1, we found that the reading time of conclusions in the Implicated-Premise stories (as compared to Fully-Deductive stories) significantly increased with age. Given that pragmatic abilities are well known to develop from childhood to adolescence (e.g., Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016;Pouscoulous et al, 2007), this effect may be due to the fact that a conclusion in the Implicated-Premise condition can be considered a source for an enriching pragmatic inference. In Experiment 2, we used fMRI to investigate the neural bases of this developmental trend in children from 8 to 15.…”

“…satisfied with the semantic reading of Some (Some and perhaps all) while adults are more likely to pragmatically enrich the utterance to Some but not all boxes have a turtle (also see Huang & Snedeker, 2009;Katsos et al, 2016). That pragmatic abilities become increasingly evident with age can be extended to a range of phenomena, including irony (Fillipova & Astington, 2010), metaphoric reference (Noveck, Bianco, & Castry, 2001;Almor, Arunachalam, & Strickland, 2007) and idioms (Caillies & Le Sourn-Bissaoui, 2008).…”