【24h】

Language, thought, and real nouns

机译:语言,思想和真实名词

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

We test the claim that acquiring a mass-count language, like English, causes speakers to think differently about entities in the world, relative to speakers of classifier languages like Japanese. We use three tasks to assess this claim: object-substance rating, quantity judgment, and word extension. Using the first two tasks, we present evidence that learning mass-count syntax has little effect on the interpretation of familiar nouns between Japanese and English, and that speakers of these languages do not divide up referents differently along an individuation continuum, as claimed in some previous reports [Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L (2001). Individuation, relativity, and early word learning. In M. Bowerman, & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 215-256). Cambridge University Press]. Instead, we argue that previous cross-linguistic differences [Imai, M., & Gentner, D. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: Universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 62, 169-200] are attributable to "lexical statistics" [Gleitman, L., & Papafragou. A. (2005). Language and thought. In K. Holyoak, & R. Morrison (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 633-661). Cambridge University Press]. Speakers of English are more likely to think that a novel ambiguous expression like "the blicket" refers to a kind of object (relative to speakers of Japanese) because speakers of English are likely to assume that "blicket" is a count noun rather than a mass noun, based on the relative frequency of each kind of word in English. This is confirmed by testing Mandarin-English bilinguals with a word extension task. We find that bilinguals tested in English with mass-count ambiguous syntax extend novel words like English monolinguals (and assume that a word like "blicket" refers to a kind of object). In contrast, bilinguals tested in Mandarin are significantly more likely to extend novel words by material. Thus, online lexical statistics, rather than non-linguistic thought, mediate cross-linguistic differences in word extension. We suggest that speakers of Mandarin, English, and Japanese draw on a universal set of lexical meanings, and that mass-count syntax allows speakers of English to select among these meanings.
机译:我们测试了这样一种说法,即与英语这样的分类器语言使用者相比,获得英语等大众语言会导致说话者对世界实体的看法有所不同。我们使用三个任务来评估此声明:对象-物质评级,数量判断和词扩展。使用前两个任务,我们提供证据表明,学习大量计数语法对日语和英语之间熟悉的名词的解释几乎没有影响,并且这些语言的讲者不会像个体化连续体那样对指称对象进行不同的划分。以前的报告[Gentner,D.,&Boroditsky,L(2001)。个性化,相对性和早期单词学习。在M. Bowerman和S. Levinson(编辑)的《语言习得与概念发展》(第215-256页)中。剑桥大学出版社]。相反,我们认为以前的跨语言差异[Imai,M.&&Gentner,D.(1997)。早期单词含义的跨语言研究:通用本体和语言影响。 Cognition,62,169-200]归因于“词法统计” [Gleitman,L.和Papafragou。答(2005)。语言和思想。在K. Holyoak和R. Morrison(编辑)的《剑桥思考与推理手册》(第633-661页)中。剑桥大学出版社]。讲英语的人更有可能认为像“ the blicket”这样的新颖歧义表达是一种对象(相对于讲日语的人),因为讲英语的人可能会认为“ blicket”是一个计数名词,而不是一个名词。质量名词,基于英语中每种单词的相对频率。通过对带有扩展词任务的中英文双语者进行测试,可以证实这一点。我们发现,使用大量计数歧义语法在英语中测试的双语者扩展了像英语单语者一样的新颖单词(并假设诸如“ blicket”之类的单词指的是一种对象)。相比之下,以普通话测试的双语者更有可能通过材料扩展新单词。因此,在线词汇统计而不是非语言思想会介导单词扩展中的跨语言差异。我们建议说普通话,英语和日语的人借鉴一套通用的词汇含义,并且质量计数语法允许英语使用者在这些含义中进行选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号