## Video presentation ## Check out our 5-min **video**: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HC6i58jQ_A ---------- ## Q&A and connect with us! ## **Zoom**: We will be available for Q&A over Zoom during poster session A (Thursday 12-2pm)! Please use the following link to join our Zoom meeting: https://mit.zoom.us/j/598803610 **Commenting**: Also, please make use of the comments button in the upper right corner of your screen when viewing either the poster or the video. These questions will be visible to the public as will our responses. **Email**: You can also email me (Sherry) and Filipe with any questions: {sychen,filipek}@mit.edu ---------- ## Abstract ## And presents a challenging case for language learning due to its abstract meaning and cross-categorial flexibility. Nonetheless, it is reported that even 2-year-olds productively use and in various syntactic environments (Sentence-, VP-, & NP-and), leaving open the possibility that and is acquired as an intrinsically cross-categorial operator. In this study, we focus on S-and and NP-and (1-2), using an existential subject to reliably detect differences in interpretation. (1) S-and: Somebody has a helicopter and somebody has a car. (adult: and > somebody) (2) NP-and: Somebody has a helicopter and a car. (adult: somebody > and) (1) is interpreted as describing a situation with two different individuals, one having a helicopter and the other a car, where this distinctness inference is due to the Novelty Condition (NC), under which indefinites introduce new discourse referents. Meanwhile, (2) is understood as describing a situation where one individual has both items. We conducted three experiments to see if there is evidence of and being acquired as an intrinsically cross-categorial operator. We suggest that while the results could be taken as evidence in favor of developmental asymmetry, with S-and preceding NP-and, they may also receive an alternative explanation in each experiment, which we address in upcoming studies.