Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Children's Interpretation of Conditional Connectives

Bibliographic Data

ID5901192
AuthorsDuygu Sarısoy (0000-0002-1698-5479), Semih C Aktepe (0000-0002-4776-9138), Sena Gül
Year2024
Volume9
Issue12
Pages365
Publication date2024-11-28
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLanguages (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2226-471X • E-ISSN: 2226-471X
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/languages9120365
OpenAlexW4404826953
LanguageEN
References cited27

Previous studies have shown that the uni-conditional marker if can be interpreted biconditionally in some contexts. Similarly, the biconditional marker unless may receive a biconditional interpretation in positive quantificational contexts (e.g., every) and a uni-conditional reading in negative quantificational contexts (e.g., no). However, exceptive accounts expect unless to yield a biconditional meaning in all contexts. Our aim in this preliminary study is to provide experimental evidence about how children interpret these conditional connectives. A recent study conducted with adult Turkish speakers found that unless was not semantically biconditional in either positive quantificational contexts or negative quantificational contexts (Evcen et al. 2019). We used a similar paradigm with a child-friendly adaptation to test how if (-sA), if not (değilse), and unless (-mAdIkçA) would behave with 5-year-old children acquiring Turkish. Our preliminary results indicate that children, unlike adults, disregard the antecedent hosting the conditional connective but focus only on the consequent hosting the quantifier structure. We argue this may be related to the higher syntactic and semantic complexity in these structures incurring heavy working memory demands

Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Natural language processing · Child and Animal Learning Development · Computer Science · Language Development and Disorders · Psychology · Reading and Literacy Development · Philosophy

  • The growth of logical thinking

    Bärbel Inhelder, Jean Piaget et al.•1958

  • Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method

    Open Access•Daniel Lewandowski, Dorota Kurowicka et al.•Journal of Multivariate Analysis•2009

  • Use of the mutual exclusivity assumption by young word learners

    Open Access•Ellen M Markman, Judith L Wasow et al.•Cognitive Psychology•2003

  • Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing

    Open Access•Dale J Barr, Roger Levy et al.•Journal of Memory and Language•2013

  • Compositionality, Context and Semantic Values

    Open Access•Gennaro Chierchia, K Fintel et al.•Compositionality, context and…•2009

  • The Development of Conditional Reasoning

    Open Access•Henry Markovits, Pierre Barrouillet•Developmental Review•2002

  • Conditionals and Compositionality

    Open Access•James Higginbotham•Philosophical Perspectives•2003

  • On Assertion and Indicative Conditionals

    Frank Jackson•The Philosophical Review•1979

  • Good-Enough Representations in Language Comprehension

    Open Access•Fernanda Ferreira, Karl G D Bailey et al.•Current Directions in Psychological…•2002

  • Quantified Conditionals and Compositionality

    Open Access•Janneke Huitink•Language and Linguistics Compass•2010

  • Quantifiers and 'If'-Clauses

    Kai Von Fintel, Kai Fintel•The Philosophical Quarterly•1998

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae