Plural Reference

A plural referring expression ('the F s' or 'Tom, Dick and Harriet') may be used to refer either distributively, saying something which applies to each of the F s individually, or collectively, to the F s taken as a single totality. Predicate Logic has to analyse both uses in terms of singular reference, treating them quite differently in so doing; but we think of such an expression as functioning in basically the same way in both kinds of use. This understanding can be vindicated if we recognise that what a plural referring expression picks out is not either an aggregate simpliciter or a set, but a plurality – an aggregate taken relative to a principle for individuating its constituents; this admits of being seen either as many things or as one. In any given case, it is the nature of what is being said about the plurality which tells us whether the reference to it is to be taken as distributive, collective, or a combination of the two. Talk about pluralities is extensional. Augmenting Predicate Logic to accommodate the distinctive inference-pattern associated with distributive plural reference is simple – and arguably necessary, to cope with cases in which distributive and collective reference are essentially combined (e.g., attributions of concerted action).     

Conceptual Locations and Pronominal Reference in American Sign Language

We report the results of an experiment investigating the ramifications of using space to express coreference in American Sign Language (ASL). Nominals in ASL can be associated with locations in signing space, and pronouns are directed toward those locations to convey coreference. A probe recognition technique was used to investigate the case of "locus doubling" in which a single referent is associated with two distinct spatial locations. The experiment explored whether an ASL pronoun activates both its antecedent referent and the location associated with that referent. An introductory discourse associated a referent (e.g, MOTHER) with two distinct locations (eg., STOREleft, KITCHENright), and a continuation sentence followed that either contained a pronoun referring to the referent in one location or contained no anaphora (the control sentence). Twenty-four deaf participants made lexical decisions to probe signs presented during the continuation sentences. The probe signs were either the referent of the pronoun, the referent-location determined by the pronoun, or the most recently mentioned location (not referenced by the pronoun). The results indicated that response times to referent nouns were faster in the pronoun than in the no-pronoun control condition and that response times to the location signs did not differ across conditions. Thus, the spatial nature of coreference in ASL does not alter the processing mechanism underlying the on-line interpretation of pronouns. Pronouns activate only referent nouns, not spatial location nouns associated with the referent.     

Referential and Non-referential Uses of the Third Person Pronominal Subject in Spanish

This paper studies the role of two different types of motivation that have been proposed to explain the use of subject personal pronouns in Spanish, namely their function as indications for the addressee to identify the subject’s referent, and their suitability for expressing informational values such as contrastiveness or focus. This study focuses exclusively on third-person forms and relies on conversational data. The distribution of third-person pronouns is analysed combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. It will be argued that the informational and referential properties of subject personal pronouns are by themselves insufficient to account for their expression, their occurrence depending crucially on their activation through the previous use of units of the same type.     

Frames of Reference and Antecedentless Anaphora in Spanish Conversation

This study examines native Spanish speakers’ use of anaphoric pronouns and null subjects in conversational discourse in the absence of coreferential antecedents. It also considers the adequacy of Gundel et al.’s proposal  (Language 69(2):274–307, 1993) that the cognitive status “in focus” corresponds with speakers’ use of minimal referring expressions (i.e., unstressed pronouns and zeros). Analysis of naturally occurring Spanish conversation shows how the felicitous use and interpretation of non-canonical (antecedentless) anaphoric pronouns and null subjects are possible due to the activation of underlying cognitive frames that are shared by the interlocutors. Furthermore, the speaker’s mention of a referent, dubbed a “neighborhood antecedent” by Langacker (Conceptual grouping and pronominal anaphora, in: Fox (ed) Studies in anaphora, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996), and the information “filled in” over the course of the conversation on account of the activation of relevant cognitive frames, both license and disambiguate the non-canonical anaphoric relations.     

The Development of Anaphora Resolution at the Syntax-Discourse Interface: Pronominal Subjects in Greek Learners of Spanish

This study explores the development of anaphora resolution (AR) in late sequential bilinguals, namely, adult Greek learners of Spanish at three proficiency levels (intermediate, lower advanced, upper advanced). The use of an overt/null pronominal subject anaphor is investigated in three discourse contexts: topic-continuity (a single antecedent requiring a null pronoun), contrastive-focus (two same-gender potential antecedents requiring an overt pronoun to avoid ambiguity) and emphatic (three same-gender potential antecedents showing unclear preference for either overt or null pronoun). Crucially, AR behaves similarly in Greek and Spanish. Results from an offline contextualised acceptability judgement task show that similarity between the learner’s first (L1) and second (L2) languages does not necessarily facilitate the learning task. Even very advanced learners show deficits, which are selective since not all discursive contexts are equally affected. The results are better accounted for by general pragmatic economy principles: Learners prefer being redundant (overuse of overt pronouns in topic-continuity contexts) to ambiguous (acceptance of null pronouns in contrastive-focus contexts). Such tolerance for redundancy may reflect a more general pragmatic tendency, as also reported in child L1 development, adult L2 development and also in native grammars.     

语篇中代词指代的研究进展

代词的指代在语篇局部连贯性中具有关键作用。中心理论是代词指称中的重要理论,它解释了语篇中代词的分布规律;注意驱动理论是在中心理沦的基础上结合重音预设解释重音或非重音代词。影响代词指称的因素有语义因素和结构因素。对代词的认知研究另一方面主要集中在对歧义代词的解释．对歧义代词的解释的研究一方面采用重复姓名不利实验范式,另一方面的研究采用的研究方法是探测词任务。在汉语中对代词的研究主要是对文本语篇的研究。     

Changes in Pronominal Usage in a Classroom Situation

Changes in pronominal usage of students were investigated in a classroom situation where attention to usage was heightened by instructor use of 'she' as the generic singular, and by instructor assessment of reactions to the practice. Two classes (N = 74) constituted the experimental group. Analyses of pronominal usage in the written work of students (compared to a control group, N=20) and questionnaires to obtain student reaction to instructor usage and student views on language usage were the principal measures used. Results indicated a change in use of pronouns with more specific use of "he," a reduction of use of "he" as the generic singular, and use of "she" as a generic. Results indicate that pronominal usage is susceptible to change.     

Sets and Plural Comprehension

The state of affairs of some things falling under a predicate is supposedly a single entity that collects these things as its constituents. But whether we think of a state of affairs as a fact, a proposition or a possibility, problems will arise if we adopt a plural logic. For plural logic says that any plurality include themselves, so whenever there are some things, the state of affairs of their plural self-inclusion should be a single thing that collects them all. This leads to paradoxes analogous to those that afflict naïve set theory. Here I suggest that they are the very same paradoxes, because sets can be reduced to states of affairs. However, to obtain a consistent theoretical reduction we must restrict the usual axiom scheme of Comprehension for plural logic to ‘stratified’ formulas, to avoid viciously circular definitions. I prove that with this modification to the background plural logic, the theory of states of affairs is consistent; moreover, it yields the axioms of the familiar set theory NFU.     

多元目标与社会稳定

社会稳定不仅是一个现实问题 ,也是一个理论问题。对社会稳定的不同理解和界定 ,直接影响着致力于社会稳定的实践及其结果。从理论上说 ,社会本身是由多维度组成的结构整体 ,每一社会单元组织都依存于这个结构整体的不同维度之上 ,并朝着不同的方向用力。传统社会 ,由于社会单元组织的目标单一 ,因而是向一个点上用力 ,从而导致社会结构紧张 ,使社会产生不稳定。现代社会 ,由于改革开放 ,使社会目标多元化 ,也使社会结构整体出现松弛的现象。但这并不是不稳定 ,相反 ,正是现代意义下的动态稳定     

Acculturation Attitudes in Plural Societies

Dans les sociétés culturellement diversifiés, les individus peuvent présenter des attitudes relatives à leurs relations avec les autres et les groupes. Ces attitudes (dites "attitudes d'acculturation") sont liées à des prises de position sur deux problèmes généraux posés à toute personne en acculturation: la préservation culturelle de son propre groupe et le contact avec les autres groupes. On définit les attitudes d'assimilation, d'intégration, de séparation et de marginalisation, puis on les mesure dans plusieurs groupes en acculturation d'Australie et du Canada (les indigènes, les immigrants et les groupes ethniques implantés). On donne la validité et la fidélité des échelles d'attitude, puis on analyse les relations des échelles entre elles par rapport aux deux problèmes sous-jacents que sont la préservation et le contact. Enfin, quelques-unes des applications pratiques des attitudes d'acculturation sont envisagées.     

Plural Logic and Sensitivity to Order

Sentences that exhibit sensitivity to order (e.g. John and Mary arrived at school in that order and Mary and John arrived at school in that order) present a challenge for the standard formulation of plural logic. In response, some authors have advocated new versions of plural logic based on fine-grained notions of plural reference, such as serial reference [Hewitt 2012] and articulated reference [Ben-Yami 2013]. The aim of this article is to show that sensitivity to order should be accounted for without altering the standard formulation of plural logic. In particular, sensitivity to order does not call for a fine-grained notion of plural reference. We point out that the phenomenon in question is quite broad and that current proposals are not equipped to deal with the full range of cases in which order plays a role. Then we develop an alternative and unified account, which locates the phenomenon not in the way in which plural terms can refer, but in the meaning of special expressions such as in that order and respectively.     

Plural signification and the Liar paradox

In recent years, speech-act theory has mooted the possibility that one utterance can signify a number of different things. This pluralist conception of signification lies at the heart of Thomas Bradwardine’s solution to the insolubles, logical puzzles such as the semantic paradoxes, presented in Oxford in the early 1320s. His leading assumption was that signification is closed under consequence, that is, that a proposition signifies everything which follows from what it signifies. Then any proposition signifying its own falsity, he showed, also signifies its own truth and so, since it signifies things which cannot both obtain, it is simply false. Bradwardine himself, and his contemporaries, did not elaborate this pluralist theory, or say much in its defence. It can be shown to accord closely, however, with the prevailing conception of logical consequence in England in the fourteenth century. Recent pluralist theories of signification, such as Grice’s, also endorse Bradwardine’s closure postulate as a plausible constraint on signification, and so his analysis of the semantic paradoxes is seen to be both well-grounded and plausible.

Mereological Composition and Plural Quantifier Semantics

Mereological universalists and nihilists disagree on the conditions for composition. In this paper, we show how this debate is a function of one’s chosen semantics for plural quantifiers. Debating mereologists have failed to appreciate this point because of the complexity of the debate and extraneous theoretical commitments. We eliminate this by framing the debate between universalists and nihilists in a formal model where these two theses about composition are contradictory. The examination of the two theories in the model brings clarity to a debate in which opponents frequently talk past one another. With the two views stated precisely, our investigation reveals the dependence of the mereologists’ ontological commitments on the semantics of plural quantifiers. Though we discuss the debate with respect to a simplified and idealized model, the insights provided will make more complex debates on composition more productive and deflationist criticisms of the debate less substantial.     

Pronominal Resolution and Gap Filling in Agrammatic Aphasia: Evidence from Eye Movements

This paper reports the results of three studies examining comprehension and real-time processing of pronominal (Experiment 1) and Wh-movement (Experiments 2 and 3) structures in agrammatic and unimpaired speakers using eyetracking. We asked the following questions: (a) Is off-line comprehension of these constructions impaired in agrammatic listeners?, (b) Do agrammatic, like unimpaired, listeners show eye movement patterns indicative of automatic pronominal reference resolution and/or gap-filling?, and (c) Do eyetracking patterns differ when sentences are correctly versus incorrectly interpreted, or do automatic processes prevail in spite of comprehension failure? Results showed that off-line comprehension of both pronoun and Wh-movement structures was impaired in our agrammatic cohort. However, the aphasic participants showed visual evidence of real-time reference resolution as they processed binding structures, including both pronouns and reflexives, as did our unimpaired control participants. Similarly, both the patients and the control participants showed patterns consistent with successful gap filling during processing of Wh-movement structures. For neither pronominal nor movement structures did we find evidence of delayed processing. Notably, these patterns were found for the aphasic participants even when they incorrectly interpreted target sentences, with the exception of object relative constructions. For incorrectly interpreted sentences, we found end of sentence lexical competition effects. These findings indicate that aberrant lexical integration, rather than representational deficits or generally slowed processing, may underlie agrammatic aphasic listener’s comprehension failure.     

Monism, Emergence, and Plural Logic

In this paper I argue that we need to take irreducibly plural logic more seriously in metaphysical debates due to the fact that the verdict of many metaphysical debates hangs on it. I give two examples. The main example I focus on is the debate recently revived by Jonathan Schaffer over the fundamental cardinality of the world. I show how the three main arguments provided by Schaffer are unsound in virtue of an employment of plural logic. The second example I give is a more general issue about the possibility of emergent properties of mereological wholes. Employing plural logic there is a new way to understand such cases. The upshot is that plural logic greatly matters to metaphysics and hence can no longer be ignored the way it has in this area.     

On the Innocence and Determinacy of Plural Quantification

Plural logic is widely assumed to have two important virtues: ontological innocence and determinacy. It is claimed to be innocent in the sense that it incurs no ontological commitments beyond those already incurred by the first‐order quantifiers. It is claimed to be determinate in the sense that it is immune to the threat of non‐standard (Henkin) interpretations that confronts higher‐order logics on their more traditional, set‐based semantics. We challenge both claims. Our challenge is based on a Henkin‐style semantics for plural logic that does not resort to sets or set‐like objects to interpret plural variables, but adopts the view that a plural variable has many objects as its values. Using this semantics, we also articulate a generalized notion of ontological commitment which enables us to develop some ideas of earlier critics of the alleged ontological innocence of plural logic.