What do speaker judgments tell us about theories of quantifier scope in German?

In this paper we use German data to evaluate configurational and multi-factor approaches to quantifier scope. Configurational theories derive scope relations syntactically at the level of Logical Form; semantic and pragmatic factors are either built into the syntactic representation or ignored, at least during the first derivational step. By contrast, multi-factor approaches consider syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of quantifiers as multiple constraints affecting quantifier scope. We examined predictions for quantifier scope in German of the configurational theory by Frey (1993) and of the multi-factor account by Pafel (2005). These fundamentally different approaches were tested in a series of picture verification experiments to assess scope preferences in doubly quantified German sentences. The results show that at least three factors affect the preferred scope. Our findings are neither fully consistent with Frey’s configurational theory nor with Pafel’s multi-factor approach; both theories made incorrect predictions for German doubly quantified sentences with a subject-before-object word order. For object-before-subject sentences, however, the experimental data by and large support the predictions of Pafel’s (2005) multi-factor approach.

[1]  Oliver Bott,et al.  Easy Solutions for a Hard Problem? The Computational Complexity of Reciprocals with Quantificational Antecedents , 2013, ESSLLI Logic & Cognition Workshop.

[2]  Adrian Brasoveanu,et al.  Strategies for scope taking , 2015 .

[3]  Martin J. Pickering,et al.  How Do People Construct Logical Form During Language Comprehension? , 2010, Psychological science.

[4]  C. Barker Continuations and the Nature of Quantification , 2002 .

[5]  Jon Sprouse,et al.  A Test of the Cognitive Assumptions of Magnitude Estimation: Commutativity does not Hold for Acceptability Judgments , 2011 .

[6]  Susanne Lynn Tunstall,et al.  The interpretation of quantifiers : semantics & processing , 1998 .

[7]  Simon P. Liversedge,et al.  Competition During the Processing of Quantifier Scope Ambiguities: Evidence from Eye Movements during Reading , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  Frank Keller,et al.  Gradience in Grammar: Experimental and Computational Aspects of Degrees of Grammaticality , 2001 .

[9]  A. Sorace,et al.  MAGNITUDE ESTIMATION OF LINGUISTIC ACCEPTABILITY , 1996 .

[10]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Scope Inversion under the Rise-Fall Contour in German , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[11]  Uli Sauerland On Quantifier Raising in German , 2003 .

[12]  Jack Catlin,et al.  Lexical and structural cues to quantifier scope relations , 1980 .

[13]  G. Fanselow,et al.  On the Informativity of Different Measures of Linguistic Acceptability , 2011 .

[14]  Karen Miller,et al.  An Experimental Study on Child Comprehension of Spanish Indefinites and Bare Singulars , 2004 .

[15]  Sam Featherston,et al.  That-trace in German , 2005 .

[16]  Andrea Gualmini,et al.  The Role of Partitivity in Child Language , 2004 .

[17]  R. May The grammar of quantification , 1978 .

[18]  Danny Fox,et al.  On Logical Form , 2008 .

[19]  Kathryn Gillen The comprehension of doubly quantified sentences , 1991 .

[20]  T. Reinhart Anaphora and semantic interpretation , 1983 .

[21]  Paul Boersma,et al.  Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer , 2002 .

[22]  M. Dalrymple,et al.  Reciprocal Expressions and the Concept of Reciprocity , 1998 .

[23]  Oliver Bott,et al.  The Processing Domain of Scope Interaction , 2015, J. Semant..

[24]  K. Paterson,et al.  Processing doubly quantified sentences: Evidence from eye movements , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Susumo Kuno Remarks on quantifier scope , 1991 .

[26]  Veena D. Dwivedi,et al.  Interpreting Quantifier Scope Ambiguity: Evidence of Heuristic First, Algorithmic Second Processing , 2013, PloS one.

[27]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  On the Identification of Quantifiers’ Witness Sets: A Study of Multi-quantifier Sentences , 2014, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[28]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Referential and quantificational indefinites , 1982 .

[29]  Jack Catlin,et al.  Semantic representations as procedures for verification , 1975 .

[30]  Anthony S. Kroch,et al.  The semantics of scope in English , 1979 .

[31]  Annabel Cormack,et al.  Ambiguity and quantification , 1981 .

[32]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities , 1993, Cognition.

[33]  Daniel Büring,et al.  The Great Scope Inversion Conspiracy , 1995 .