Search

Using animate nouns to refer to entities in the world involves a complex interaction of ontology, cognition and language. The present study evaluates two accounts of the use of animate nouns, with Mandarin Chinese as the vehicle for testing between the competing accounts. One account was proposed by Cheng et al. (2008. How universal is the Universal Grinder? In Marjo van Koppen & Bert Botma (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, 50–62. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins). These researchers contend that the count interpretation is basic for Mandarin animate nouns, due to a lexical blocking effect. To access the alternative, mass interpretation requires some kind of pragmatic coercion. A second account was proposed by Pelletier, based on English (1975. Non-Singular reference: Some preliminaries. Philosophia 5(4). 451–465; 2012. Lexical nouns are both +MASS and +COUNT, but they are neither +MASS nor + COUNT. In Diane Massam (ed.), Count and mass across languages, 9–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press). We extend this account to Mandarin animate nouns, proposing that they are encoded in the mental lexicon with both a count sense and a mass sense. To adjudicate between the accounts, we conducted four experiments that were designed to assess the interpretation assigned to animate nouns by Mandarin-speaking children and adults. The experimental conditions manipulated both the syntactic structures of the sentences and the non-linguistic contexts in which those sentences were presented. The experimental findings support our proposal that both mass and count interpretations of animate nouns are available to children and adults when sentences are presented in contexts that are congruent with these interpretations. The findings also suggest that syntactic structure is an even more critical factor in determining the interpretation that is assigned to animate nouns in Mandarin.

The semantics of superordinate collectives (superordinates hereafter) such as English furniture are argued to be count or mass, or to allow both count and mass readings. When tested experimentally, however, it has repeatedly been reported that superordinates denote individuals in a wide range of typologically distinct languages, including Mandarin. A close examination of the experimental method and design commonly used in previous research suggests, however, that the attested individual-denoting reading might only be the preferred reading in neutral contexts rather than the only reading that superordinates allow. In the present study, using a Truth Value Judgment Task we investigate the interpretation of Mandarin superordinates by Mandarin-speaking adults and 4–6-year-old children. We found that bare superordinates can convey both individual-denoting and non-individual-denoting readings depending on specific contexts provided, but such contextual manipulation cannot override morphosyntax (the presence of an individual classifier that selects an individual-denoting reading only). Taken together, our experimental data indicate that both contextual and morphosyntactic information play an important role in the interpretation of Mandarin superordinates, but that they function in different ways. In a word, the present study contributes new data and opens new perspectives for further investigation in the interpretation of superordinates in Mandarin as well as in other languages.