Chapter 9
Quantifier comprehension in Brazilian Portuguese and the extra-object visual effect
Universal quantifiers are complex for children to comprehend, and over-exhaustive errors can occur
even with adults in sentence-picture verification tasks. This paper addresses visual design factors that may explain
these difficulties. We examine what we call the “single extra object attraction hypothesis” (SEOH), according to which
the visual prominence of a uniquely unpaired extra object compromises attentional resources during these tasks. We
manipulated the type of extra-object – single or double – in an eye-tracking experiment with adult speakers of
Brazilian Portuguese. Contrary to the SEOH prediction, double objects gave rise to earlier and longer fixations than
single objects. There was no difference in accuracy. We discuss the implications of these results for developmental
research.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Children and adults’ quantifier interpretation
- 3.Eye-tracking and quantifier comprehension
- 4.The eye-tracking experiment
- Hypothesis and predictions
- Method
- Participants
- Material
- Apparatus
- Procedure
- Data treatment and analysis
- Results
- Accuracy
- Eye movement data
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
-
Notes
-
References
References (32)
References
Aravind, A., de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., Lonigan, C. J., Phillips, B. M., Clancy, J., Landry, S. H., Swank, P. R., Assel, M., Taylor, H. B., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T., & Valiente, C. (2017). Children’s
quantification with every over time. Glossa, 2(1). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (2015). Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software, 67(1). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual
accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence
formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47–67.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brooks, P. J., & Sekerina, I. A. (2006). Shallow
processing of universal quantification: A comparison of monolingual and bilingual
adults. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Cognitive Science
Society, Vol. 28(No. 28).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Corrêa, L. M., & Augusto, M. R. A. (2019). Image
effects and long distance dependencies. In ExLing
2019: Proceedings of 10th International Conference of Experimental
Linguistics (pp. 53–56). International Society of Experimental Linguistics. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Corrêa, L. M., Rodrigues, E. dos S., & Augusto, M. R. A. Image
processing in the tracking of DLD. In ExLing 2022:
Proceedings of 13th International Conference of Experimental
Linguistics (pp. 41–44). International Society of Experimental Linguistics. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Crain, S., Thornton, R., Boster, C., Conway, L., Lillo-Martin, D., & Woodams, E. (1996). Quantification
without qualification. Language
Acquisition, 5(2), 83–153. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drozd, K. F., & Loosbroek, E. V. (2006). The
effect of context on children’s interpretations of universally quantified
sentences. In V. van Geenhoven (Ed.), Semantics in
acquisition (pp. 115–140). Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Escobar, L., & Torrens, V. (2008). The
acquisition of universal quantifiers in
Spanish. In P. Guijarro-Fuentes, M. P. Larrañaga, & J. Clibbens (Eds.), First
language acquisition of morphology and syntax: Perspectives across languages and
learners (pp. 119–135). John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Freeman, N., & Stedmon, J. (1986). How
children deal with natural language
quantification. In I. Kurcz, G. Shugar, & J. Danks (Eds.), Knowledge
and
language (pp. 21–48.). North-Holland.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gavarró, A., & Escobar, M. Á. (2011). A
pilot study of quantification in child Catalan. Zeitschrift Fur
Katalanistik, 24(1), 213–225.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Geng, J. J., & Witkowski, P. (2019). Template-to-distractor
distinctiveness regulates visual search efficiency. Current Opinion in
Psychology, 29, 119–125. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Geurts, B. (2003). Quantifying
kids. Language
Acquisition, 11(4), 197–218. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gouro, T., Norita, H., Nakajima, M., & Ariji, K. (2001). Children’s
interpretation of universal quantifier and pragmatic
interference. In Y. Otsu (Ed.), The
proceedings of the Fourth Tokyo Conference on
Psycholinguistics (pp. 61–78). Hitsuzi Syobo.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Griffin, Z. M., & Bock, K. (2000). What
the eyes say about speaking. Psychological
Science, 11(4). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The
early growth of logic in the child. Routledge and Kegan Paul.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuznetsova, J., Babyonyshev, M., Reich, J., Hart, L., & Grigorenko, E. (2007). The
acquisition of universal quantifiers in
Russian. In A. Belikova, L. Meroni, & M. Umeda (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 2nd Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America
(GALANA) (pp. 224–232). Cascadilla Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lopes, R. (2014). How
children distribute: The acquisition of the universal quantifiers in Brazilian
Portuguese. Revista da
ABRALIN, 13(2), 351–374.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mazuka, R., Jincho, N., & Oishi, H. (2009). Development
of executive control and language processing. Language and Linguistics
Compass, 3(1), 59–89. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Minai, U., Jincho, N., Yamane, N., & Mazuka, R. (2012). What
hinders child semantic computation: Children’s universal quantification and the development of cognitive
control. Journal of Child
Language, 39(5), 919–956. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
O’Grady, W., Suzuki, T., & Yoshinaga, N. (2010). Quantifier
spreading: New evidence from Japanese. Language Learning and
Development, 6(2), 116–125. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Peschel, A. O., & Orquin, J. L. (2013). A
review of the findings and theories on surface size effects on visual
attention. Frontiers in
Psychology, 4, 902. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Philip, W. (1995). Event
quantification in the acquisition of universal quantification (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of
Massachusetts, Amherst.
Prat-Sala, M., & Branigan, H. P. (2000). Discourse
constraints on syntactic processing in language production: A cross-linguistic study in English and
Spanish. Journal of Memory and
Language, 42(2), 168–182. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rakhlin, N. (2007). Children’s
interpretation of negative determiners as a window into
Q-spreading. In A. Belikova, L. Meroni, & M. Umeda (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 2nd Conference of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North
America (pp. 363–373). Cascadilla Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Core
Team. (2021). R: A language and environment
for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved
on 23 January
2024 from [URL]
Roeper, T., & E. Matthei (1974). On
the acquisition of some and all. Presented at the Sixth Child Language Research
Forum, Stanford University, April 1974.
Roeper, T., Strauss, U., & Pearson, B. (2004). The
acquisition path of quantifiers: Two kinds of spreading (Unpublished
manuscript). University of
Massachusetts, Amherst.
Sekerina, I., & Sauermann, A., (2017). Quantifier
spreading in child eye movements: A case of the Russian quantifier kazhdyj
‘every’. Glossa: A Journal of General
Linguistics, 2(1), 66. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sugisaki, K., & Isobe, M. (2001). Quantification
without qualification without plausible
dissent. In J.- Y. Kim & A. Werle (Eds.), The
Proceedings of
SULA 1 (pp. 97–100). GLSA Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, & K. M., Sedivy, J. E. (1995). Integration
of visual and linguistic information in spoken language
comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yu, X., & Geng, J. J. (2019). The
attentional template is shifted and asymmetrically sharpened by distractor
context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 45(3), 336–353. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)