Generics and Alternatives.

Arnold Kochari, Robert Van Rooij, Katrin Schulz
Author Information
  1. Arnold Kochari: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  2. Robert Van Rooij: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  3. Katrin Schulz: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Abstract

In this paper we argue that for the (probabilistic) interpretation of generic sentences of the form "s are ," three types of alternatives play a role: (i) alternative features of , (ii) alternative groups, or kinds, of , and (iii) alternative causal background factors. In the first part of this paper we argue for the relevance of these alternatives. In the second part, we describe the results of some experiments that empirically tested in particular the second use of alternatives.

Keywords

References

  1. Psychol Rev. 2019 Apr;126(3):395-436 [PMID: 30762385]
  2. Lang Cogn Process. 2010 Feb 1;25(2):261-276 [PMID: 20352078]
  3. Mem Cognit. 1995 Jul;23(4):510-24 [PMID: 7666763]
  4. Cognition. 2007 Oct;105(1):166-83 [PMID: 17094957]
  5. Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31 [PMID: 17835457]
  6. Cogn Sci. 2010 Nov 1;34(8):1452-1482 [PMID: 21116475]
  7. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Feb;4(2):66-72 [PMID: 10652524]
  8. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1965 Sep;2:301-10 [PMID: 14333301]
  9. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Sep;117(3):227-47 [PMID: 2971760]
  10. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1968 Aug;66(1):1-5 [PMID: 5672628]
  11. Psychol Rev. 1985 Jul;92(3):289-316 [PMID: 4023146]
  12. Cognition. 2006 Feb;99(1):73-112 [PMID: 16443448]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0alternativesalternativepaperarguepartsecondexperimentsprobabilisticinterpretationgenericsentencesform"s"threetypesplayrole:featuresiigroupskindsiiicausalbackgroundfactorsfirstrelevancedescriberesultsempiricallytestedparticularuseGenericsAlternativesgenericsprobabiltiysemantics

Similar Articles

Cited By