Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
<p>Lidz et al. (2011) propose that meanings provide canonical verification strategies and argue for specifying <em>most </em>in terms of cardinality and subtraction. We provide cross-linguistic support for these hypotheses by testing two Cantonese determiners: <em>daai-do-sou</em>, which has a proportional meaning like <em>most</em>, and <em>zeoi-do</em>, which has a “largest subset” meaning. When asked to evaluate statements with respect to displays, both determiners led participants to rely on their Approximate Number System. But whereas <em>zeoi-do </em>biased a strategy of serial comparison, <em>daai-do-sou</em>, like <em>most</em>, biased superset subtraction. Even in cases where either procedure could be successfully deployed, participants nonetheless used distinct strategies.</p>
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.