The Development of “Most” Comprehension and Its Potential Dependence on Counting Ability in Preschoolers

Quantifiers are a test case for an interface between psychological questions, which attempt to specify the numerical content that supports the semantics of quantifiers, and linguistic questions, which uncover the range of possible quantifier meanings allowable within the constraints of the syntax. Here we explore the development of comprehension of most in English, of particular interest as it calls on precise numerical content that, in adults, requires an understanding of large exact numerosities (e.g., 23 blue dots and 17 yellow is an instance of “most of the dots are blue”). In a sample of 100 children 2 to 5 years of age we find that (a) successful most comprehension in cases with two salient subsets is achieved at 3 years, 7 months of age, and (b) most comprehension is independent of knowledge of large exact number words; that is, knowledge of large exact number words is neither necessary, as evidenced by children who understand “most” but not “four,” nor sufficient, as evidenced by children who understand “nine” but not “most.”

[1]  Taraneh Hemami Most wanted , 2007, SIGGRAPH '07.

[2]  M. Braine,et al.  What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each? , 1996, Cognition.

[3]  M. C. Caselli,et al.  The acquisition of Italian morphology: implications for models of language development , 1992, Journal of Child Language.

[4]  Tim Hunter,et al.  Beyond Truth Conditions: The Semantics of "most" , 2008 .

[5]  E. Spelke,et al.  Language and Conceptual Development series Core systems of number , 2004 .

[6]  S. Carey Bootstrapping & the origin of concepts , 2004, Daedalus.

[7]  Michel Martinez,et al.  Most Wanted , 2005 .

[8]  George Boolos,et al.  Logic, Logic, and Logic , 2000 .

[9]  K. Wynn Children's acquisition of the number words and the counting system , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  Robert H. Logie,et al.  Cognitive processes in counting. , 1987 .

[11]  Justin Halberda,et al.  Acquisition of English Number Marking: The Singular-Plural Distinction , 2006 .

[12]  Justin Halberda,et al.  Beyond Truth Conditions : an investigation into the semantics of ‘ most ’ , 2007 .

[13]  L. Feigenson,et al.  Multiple Spatially Overlapping Sets Can Be Enumerated in Parallel , 2006, Psychological science.

[14]  J. Barwise,et al.  Generalized quantifiers and natural language , 1981 .

[15]  Justin Halberda,et al.  Developmental change in the acuity of the "Number Sense": The Approximate Number System in 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-year-olds and adults. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[16]  E. Spelke,et al.  Large number discrimination in 6-month-old infants , 2000, Cognition.

[17]  M. Guasti Verb Syntax in Italian Child Grammar: Finite and Nonfinite Verbs , 1993 .

[18]  S. Carey,et al.  Re-visiting the competence/performance debate in the acquisition of the counting principles , 2006, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  Martin Hackl,et al.  On the grammar and processing of proportional quantifiers: most versus more than half , 2009 .

[20]  C. Gallistel,et al.  The Child's Understanding of Number , 1979 .

[21]  Susan Carey,et al.  One, two, three, four, nothing more: An investigation of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles , 2007, Cognition.

[22]  L. Gleitman,et al.  Asymmetries in the Acquisition of Numbers and Quantifiers , 2006 .

[23]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  A Rational-Constructivist Account of Early Learning About Numbers and Objects , 1993 .

[24]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax: The Nature of Early Child Grammars of English , 1990 .