Pairing Words with Syntactic Frames: Syntax, Semantics, and Count-Mass Usage

Two experiments examined English speakers’ choices of count or mass compatible frames for nouns varying in imageability (concrete, abstract) and noun class (count, mass). Pairing preferences with equative (much/many) and non-equative (less/fewer) constructions were compared for groups of teenagers, young adults, and older adults. Deviations from normative usage were, for all ages, larger for count than for mass nouns, for the non-equative than for the equative construction, and for abstract count than for concrete count nouns. These results indicate that mass syntax is not a developmental default, support proposals that mass syntax is more flexible than count syntax, verify the non-prescriptive use of less with count nouns, and extend the interaction of syntax and semantics in noun classification to older ages, with older adults showing a reduced reliance on semantics. Knowledge of frame compatibility and knowledge of noun class are also shown to be largely independent.

[1]  William D. Raymond,et al.  Acquisition of morphological variation: The case of the English definite article , 2009 .

[2]  M. Gaskell,et al.  Constraints on definite article alternation in speech production: To “thee” or not to “thee”? , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[3]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Word and Object , 1960 .

[4]  R. Jackendoff.  Parts and boundaries , 1991, Cognition.

[5]  Mutsumi Imai,et al.  On the equivalence of superordinate concepts , 1996, Cognition.

[6]  Brendan S. Gillon,et al.  Ambiguity, generality, and indeterminacy: Tests and definitions , 1990, Synthese.

[7]  Debra Ziegeler,et al.  A word of caution on coercion , 2007 .

[8]  J. Macnamara.  Cognitive basis of language learning in infants. , 1972, Psychological review.

[9]  Edward J. Wisniewski,et al.  On the conceptual basis for the count and mass noun distinction , 2003 .

[10]  T. R. Jordan,et al.  Assessing effects of viewing distance on normal Chinese reading: Some methodological and theoretical implications , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[11]  Dani Byrd,et al.  Phonetic analyses of word and segment variation using the TIMIT corpus of American english , 1994, Speech Commun..

[12]  Gennaro Chierchia,et al.  Plurality of Mass Nouns and the Notion of “Semantic Parameter” , 1998 .

[13]  P. Bloom,et al.  Possible names: The role of syntax-semantics mappings in the acquisition of nominals , 1994 .

[14]  V. Taler,et al.  Lexical access in younger and older adults: the case of the mass/count distinction. , 2007, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[15]  Evelyne Viegas,et al.  Breadth and depth of semantic lexicons , 1999 .

[16]  Mutsumi Imai,et al.  Separating the chaff from the oats: Evidence for a conceptual distinction between count noun and mass noun aggregates , 2004 .

[17]  H. V. D. van der Lely,et al.  The count-mass distinction in typically developing and grammatically specifically language impaired children: new evidence on the role of syntax and semantics. , 2008, Journal of communication disorders.

[18]  J. Snedeker,et al.  Quantity judgments and individuation: evidence that mass nouns count , 2005, Cognition.

[19]  Anna Wierzbicka.  The semantics of grammar , 1988 .

[20]  Vanessa Taler,et al.  The Mass/Count Distinction: Evidence from On-Line Psycholinguistic Performance , 1999, Brain and Language.

[21]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  A __ comprehensive grammar of the English language , 1988 .

[22]  Alice F. Healy,et al.  Foreign language learning : psycholinguistic studies on training and retention , 2013 .

[23]  Karen Wynn,et al.  Children's understanding of counting , 1990, Cognition.

[24]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[25]  Paul Bloom,et al.  Syntactic cues in the acquisition of collective nouns , 1995, Cognition.

[26]  Elaine J. Francis,et al.  Mismatch: Form-Function Incongruity and the Architecture of Grammar , 2003 .

[27]  N. Soja.  Inferences about the meanings of nouns: The relationship between perception and syntax , 1992 .

[28]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[29]  P. Gordon.  Evaluating the semantic categories hypothesis: The case of the count/mass distinction , 1985, Cognition.