University of Groningen
Acting Individually or Together?
de Koster, Anna
DOI:
10.33612/diss.169356700
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date: 2021
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
de Koster, A. (2021). Acting Individually or Together? An Investigation of Children’s Development of Distributivity. University of Groningen. https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.169356700
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
204
Bibliography
Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 19(6), 716–723.
Akaike, H. (2011). Akaike’s information criterion. In International encyclopedia of
statistical science (pp. 25–25). Springer.
Aravind, A., de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., Lonigan, C. J., Philips, B. M., Clancy, J., Landry, S. H., Swank, P. R., Assel, M., Taylor, H. B., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T., & Valiente, C. (2017). Children’s quantification with “every” over time. Glossa: A Journal of
General Linguistics, 10, 1–16.
Avrutin, S., & Thornton, R. (1994). Distributivity and binding in child grammare.
Linguistic Inquiry, 25(1), 165–171.
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and
Language, 59(4), 390–412.
Banga, A., Heutinck, I., Berends, S. M., & Hendriks, P. (2009). Some implicatures reveal semantic differences. In B. Botma & J. van Kampen (Eds.), Linguistics in
the Netherlands (Vol. 26, pp. 1–13). John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Barwise, J., & Cooper, R. (1981). Generalized quantifiers and natural language. In
Philosophy, language, and artificial intelligence (pp. 241–301). Springer,
Dordrecht.
Beghelli, F., & Stowell, T. (1997). Distributivity and negation: The syntax of each and every. In Ways of scope taking. (pp. 71–107). Springer, Dordrecht.
205
8
9
B ib liogr ap hyB
Blutner, R. (2000). Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation.
Journal of Semantics, 17(3), 189–216.
Bott, L., Bailey, T. M., & Grodner, D. (2012). Distinguishing speed from accuracy in scalar implicatures. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1), 123–142.
Bott, L., & Noveck, I. A. (2004). Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(3), 437–457.
Bott, O., & Schlotterbeck, F. (2018). Turning Adults into Children: Evidence for Resource-Based Accounts of Errors with Universal Quantification. In Linguistic
and Cognitive Aspects of Quantification (pp. 193–216). Springer, Cham.
Brasoveanu, A. (2011). Sentence-internal different as quantifier-internal anaphora.
Linguistics and Philosophy, 34(2), 93–168.
Brasoveanu, A., & Dotlačil, J. (2012). Licensing sentence-internal readings in English. In Maria Aloni, V. Kimmelman, F. Roelofen, G. Weidman Sassoon, K. Schulz, & M. Westera (Eds.), Logic, Language and Meaning: Proceedings of the 18th
Amsterdam Colloquium (pp. 122–132). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Brasoveanu, A., & Farkas, D. (2016). Indefinites. In M Aloni & P. Dekker (Eds.), The
Cambridge handbook of formal semantics (pp. 238–266). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Brooks, P. J., & Braine, M. D. S. (1996). What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each? Cognition, 60(3), 235–268.
Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). A practical information-theoretic approach.
Model selection and multimodel inference (2nd ed.). Springer, New York.
Carlson, G. N. (1987). Same and different: Some consequences for syntax and semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 10(4), 531–565.
Chambers, J. M., Cleveland, W. S., Kleiner, B., & Tukey, P. A. (1983). Graphical methods
206
Champollion, L. (2016). Covert distributivity in algebraic event semantics. Semantics
and Pragmatics, 9, 1–65.
Champollion, L. (2017). Parts of a whole: Distributivity as a bridge between aspect
and measurement. (Vol.66). Oxford University Press.
Chierchia, G. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. Structures and Beyond, 3, 39–103.
Chierchia, G., Crain, S., Guasti, M. T., Gualmini, A., & Meroni, L. (2001). The acquisition of disjunction: Evidence for a grammatical view of scalar implicatures.
Proceedings of the 25st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 25(1), 157–168. Cascadilla Press.
Chierchia, G., Fox, D., & Spector, B. (2012). The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In
Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (3rd ed.,
pp. 2297–2332).
Crain, S., & McKee, C. (1985). The acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. In S. Berman, J. W. Choe, & J. McDonough (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Northeastern Linguistic Society (pp. 94–110). GLSA, Amherst, Massachusetts.
Crain, S., Thronton, R., Boster, C., Conway, L., Lillo-Martin, D., & Woodams, E. (1996). Quantification without qualification. Language Acquisition, 5(2), 83–153. Cremers, A., Kane, F., Tieu, L., Kennedy, L., Yasutada, S., Folli, F., & Romoli, J. (2018).
Testing theories of temporal inferences: Evidence from child language. Glossa:
A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 1–21.
De Neys, W., & Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load: Dual task impact on scalar implicature. Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 128–133.
Dieussaert, K., Verkerk, S., Gillard, E., & Schaeken, W. (2011). Some effort for some: Further evidence that scalar implicatures are effortful. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 64(12), 2352–2367.
Donaldson, M., & McGarrigle, J. (1973). Some clues to the nature of semantic development. Journal of Child Language, 1(2), 185–194.
207
8
9
B ib liogr ap hyB
Dotlačil, J. (2010). A study of same, different, reciprocals and others. (Doctoral Dissertation). Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
Drozd, K. F. (2001). Children’s weak interpretations of universally quantified questions. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language Acquisition and
Conceptual Development (Issue 1, pp. 340–376). Cambridge University Press.
Drozd, K. F., van der Lely, H. K. J., & Montalto, R. (2017). Children’s comprehension of distributive universal quantification. Lingua, 198, 89–109.
Drozd, K. F., & van Loosbroek, E. (1999). Weak quantification, plausible dissent, and the development of children’s pragmatic competence. Proceedings of the 23rd
Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 184–195.
Cascadilla Press.
Foppolo, F., Guasti, M. T., & Chierchia, G. (2012). Scalar implicatures in child language: Give children a chance. Language Learning and Development., 8(4), 365–394.
Foppolo, F., Mazzaggio, G., Panzeri, F., & Surian, L. (2020). Scalar and ad-hoc pragmatic inferences in children: guess which one is easier. Journal of Child
Language, 1–23.
Frazier, L., Pacht, J. M., & Rayner, K. (1999). Taking on semantic commitments, II: Collective versus distributive readings. Cognition, 70(1), 87–104.
Geurts, B. (2003). Quantifying Kids. Language Acquisition, 11(4), 197–218. Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity Implicatures. Cambridge University Press.
Gil, D. (1982). Quantifier scope, linguistic variation, and natural language semantics.
Linguistics and Philosophy, 5(4), 421–472.
Gillon, B. S. (1987). The readings of plural noun phrases in English. Linguistics and
Philosophy, 10(2), 199–219.
Grice, P. (1957). Meaning. The Philosophical Review, 377–388.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic of Conversation. In P. Cole & J. J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and
208
Higginbotham, J. (1980). Reciprocal Interpretation. Journal of Linguistic Research,
1(3), 97–117.
de Hoop, H., & Kas, M. (1989). Sommige betekenisaspecten van enkele kwantoren, oftewel: enkele betekenisaspecten van sommige kwantoren. Interdisciplinair
Tijdschrift Voor Taal & Tekstwetenschap, 9(1), 31–49.
Horn, L. R. (1972). On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of California.
Horn, L. R. (1989). A natural history of negation. University of Chicago Press. Horn, L. R. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and
R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, form and use in context:
Linguistic applications (pp. 11–42). Georgetown: Georgetown University
Press.
Huang, Y. T., & Snedeker, J. (2009). Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology, 58(3), 376–415.
Huang, Y. T., Spelke, E., & Snedeker, J. (2013). What Exactly do Numbers Mean?
Language Learning and Development, 9(2), 105–129.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The early growth of logic in the child. (EA Lunzer & D. Papert, Trans.) London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Ioup, G. (1975). Some universals for quantifier scope. In J. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and
Semantics (Vol. 4, pp. 37–58). New York : Academic Press.
Just, M. (1974). Comprehending Quantified Sentences: The Relation Between Sentence-Picture and Semantic Memory Verification. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 216–236.
Katsos, N., & Bishop, D. V. M. (2011). Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. Cognition, 120(1), 67–81. Kaup, B., Kelter, S., & Habel, C. (2002). Representing referents of plural expressions
and resolving plural anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17(4), 405– 450.
209
8
9
B ib liogr ap hyB
Ko, V., Wieling, M., Wit, E., Nerbonne, J., & Krijnen, W. (2014). Social, geographical, and lexical influences on Dutch dialect pronunciations. Computational
Linguistics in the Netherlands Journal, 4, 29–38.
de Koster, A. M. B., Dotlačil, J., & Spenader, J. K. (2017). Children’s understanding of distributivity and adjectives of comparison. In M. LaMendola & J. Scott (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 41st annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 373–386). Cascadilla Press.
de Koster, A. M. B., Spenader, J. K., & Hendriks, P. (2018). Are Children’s Overly Distributive Interpretations and Spreading Errors Related? In A. B. Bertolini & M. J. Kaplan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd annual Boston University Conference
on Language Development (pp. 413–426). Cascadilla Press.
de Koster, A. M. B., Spenader, J. K., Dotlačil, J., & Hendriks, P. (2020). A Multiple Cue Analysis of Collective Interpretations with ‘Each.’ In M. M. Brown & A. Kohut (Eds.), Proceedings of the 44th Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development (pp. 252–265). Cascadilla Press.
de Koster, A. M. B., Spenader, J. K., & Hendriks, P. (2020a). Child-like adults: Dual-task
effects on collective versus distributive sentence interpretations. Submitted.
de Koster, A. M. B., Spenader, J. K., & Hendriks, P. (2020b). Collective Preferences in Dutch Revealed by a Covered-Box Experiment. In E. Tribushinina & M. Dingemanse (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands (pp. 53–70). John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Landman, F. (1996). Plurality. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary
Semantic Theory (pp. 425–457). Oxford, Blackwell.
Landman, F. (2000). Events and Plurality: The Jerusalem lectures. vol(76). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lasersohn, P. (1995). Plurality, conjunction and events. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized
210
Link, G. (1998). Algebraic Semantics in Language and Philosophy. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Link, G. (1991). Plural. In A. von S. and D. Wunderlich (Ed.), Semantik: Ein
internationales Handbuch der zeitgenossischen Forschung (pp. 418–440).
Berlin: de Gruyter. English translation as Chapter 2 of Link (1998).
Marty, P., & Chemla, E. (2013). Scalar implicatures: Working memory and a comparison with only. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–12.
Marty, P., Chemla, E., & Spector, B. (2013). Interpreting numerals and scalar items under memory load. Lingua, 133, 152–163.
Meyer, D. E. (1970). On the Representation and Retrieval of Stored Semantic Information. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 242–300.
Milsark, G. L. (1976). Existential Sentences in English. Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Miyamoto, Y., & Crain, S. (1991). Children’s interpretation of plural pronouns: collective vs. distributive interpretation. Proceedings of the 16nd Annual
Boston University Conference on Language Development. Cascadilla Press.
Moltmann, F. (1992). Reciprocals and same/different: Towards a semantic analysis.
Linguistics and Philosophy, 15(4), 411–462.
Musolino, J. (2009). The logical syntax of number words: Theory, acquisition and processing. Cognition, 111(1), 24–45.
Noveck, I. A. (2001). When children are more logical than adults: experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition, 78(2), 165–188.
Novogrodsky, R., Roeper, T., & Yamakoshi, K. (2013). The Collective-Distributive reading of each and every in language acquisition. In S. Stavrakaki, M. Lalioti, & P. Konstantinopoulou (Eds.), Advances in Language Acquisition. (pp. 138– 146). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Padilla-Reyes, R. E. (2018). Connections among scales, plurality, and intensionality in
211
8
9
B ib liogr ap hyB
Pagliarini, E., Fiorin, G., & Dotlačil, J. (2012). The acquisition of distributivity in pluralities. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development, 387–399. Cascadilla Press.
Parikh, P. (2000). Communication,meaning, and interpretation. Linguistics and
Philosophy, 185–212.
Perner, J., & Wimmer, H. (1985). “John thinks that Mary thinks that…” attribution of second-order beliefs by 5-to 10-year-old children. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 39(3), 437–471.
Philip, W. (1995). Event quantification in the acquisition of universal quantification. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Massachusetts.
Philip, W., & Takahashi, M. (1991). Quantifier spreading in the acquisition of Every.
University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 17(1), 283–302.
Pouscoulous, N., Noveck, I. A., Politzer, G., & Bastide, A. (2007). No A developmental investigation of processing costs in implicature production. Language
Acquisition, 14(4), 347–375.
Roberts, C. (1987). Modal subordination, anaphora, and distributivity. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Roberts, C. (2012). Information structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics, 5, 1–69.
Roeper, T., & de Villiers, J. (1993). The emergence of bound variable structure. In
Knowledge and language (pp. 105–139). Springer, Dordrecht.
Roeper, T., Pearson, B. Z., & Grace, M. (2011). Quantifier Spreading is not Distributive. Proceedings of the 35st Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development, 526–539.
Roeper, T., Strauss, U., Pearson, B. Z., de Villiers, J., Frazier, L., Gualmini, A., Hollebrandse, B., Kratzer, A., Philip, W., & Potts, C. (2004). The Acquisition Path of Quantifiers : Two Kinds of Spreading. Current Issues in Language Acquisition,
212
Rouweler, L., & Hollebrandse, B. (2015). Distributive, collective and “everything” in between: Interpretation of universal quantifiers in child and adult language.
Linguistics in the Netherlands, 32(1), 130–141.
Scha, R. (1981). Distributive, collective, and cumulative quantification. In T. J. and M. Stokhof (Ed.), Formal methods in the study of language (pp. 483–512). Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre Tracts.
Schein, B. (1993). Plurals and Events. (Vol 23). MIT Press.
Schlichting, L., van Eldik, M. C. M., Spelberg, H. L., van der Meulen, S., & van der Meulen, B. (1995). Schlichting test voor taalproductie.
Schwarz, F., Romoli, J., & Bill, C. (2015). Scalar implicatures processing : slowly accepting the truth (literally). Proceedings of Sinn Und Bedeutung, 19, 573–590. Schwarzschild, R. (1996). Pluralities. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Spenader, J. K., & Bosnic, A. (2018). Distributivity preferences for Dutch quantifiers
elk and ieder. In B. Hollebrandse, J. Kim, A. T. Perez-Leroux, & P. Schulz (Eds.),
T.O.M. and Grammar: Thoughts on Mind and Grammar: A Festschrift in honor of Tom Roeper. (Vol. 41, pp. 159–168).
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. (Vol. 142). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sullivan, K., Zaitchik, D., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (1994). Preschoolers Can Attribute Second-Order Beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 395–402.
Syrett, K., & Musolino, J. (2013). Collectivity, distributivity, and the interpretation of plural numerical expressions in child and adult language. Language
Acquisition, 20(4), 259–291.
Tunstall, S. (1998). The interpretation of quantifiers: Semantics and processing. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
van der Ziel, M.-E. (2012). The Acquisition of Scope Interpretation in Dative
Constructions Explaining children’s non-targetlike performance. (Doctoral
213
8
9
B ib liogr ap hyB
van Rij, J., van Rijn, H., & Hendriks, P. (2013). How WM Load Influences Linguistic Processing in Adults: A Computational Model of Pronoun Interpretation in Discourse. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5(3), 564–580.
van Rij, J., Wieling, M., Baayen, R. H., & van Rijn, H. (2015). itsadug: Interpreting time
series and autocorrelated data using GAMMs (R package version 2).
van Tiel, B., van Miltenburg, E., Zevakhina, N., & Geurts, B. (2016). Scalar diversity.
Journal of Semantics, 33(1), 137–175.
Wieling, M., Montemagni, S., Nerbonne, J., & Baayen, R. H. (2014). Lexical differences between Tuscan dialects and standard Italian: Accounting for geographic and sociodemographic variation using generalized additive mixed modeling.
Language, 90(3), 669–692.
Wieling, M., Nerbonne, J., & Baayen, R. H. (2011). Quantitative social dialectology: Explaining linguistic variation geographically and socially. PloSone, 6(9), e23613.
Winter, Y. (2002). Flexibility principles in Boolean semantics: The interpretation of
coordination, plurality, and scope in natural language. (Vol. 37) MIT Press.
Wood, S. N. (2006). Generalized additive models: an introduction with R. Texts in
Statistical Science, 67, 391.
Zimmermann, M. (2002). Boys buying two sausages each: On the syntax and semantics
of distance-distributivity. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Amsterdam,
