Generics oversimplified

Nous

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 28-54

  Leslie, Sarah Jane ^a  

^a PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921597391     PISSN: 00294624     EISSN: 14680068     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/nous.12039     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Asher, N., &, Morreau, M., (1995).What Some Generic Sentences Mean.In, G.N.Carlson, and, F.J.Pelletier, (eds.) The Generic Book.Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp.300-339.
2. Assarson, E., (2012).A Two-Tiered Theory of Generics: A Synthesis of Leslie's and Liebesman's Theories.M.A.Thesis, Lund University.
3. Brandone, A., Cimpian, A., Leslie, S.J., &, Gelman, S.A., (2012).Do lions have manes? For children, generics are about kinds not quantities.Child Development, 83 (2), 423-433.
4. Carlson, G., (1977).Reference to Kinds in English.Ph.D.dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
5. Carlson, G., (1989).On the Semantic Composition of English Generic Sentences.In, G.Chierchia, B.Partee, and, R.Turner, (eds.), Properties, Types and Meanings, Vol.II: Semantic Issues, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp.167-192.
6. Carlson, G., (2010).Generics and Concepts.In, F.J.Pelletier, (ed.), Kinds, Things, and Stuff.New York: Oxford University Press, pp.16-36.
7. Chierchia, G., (1998).Reference to Kinds Across Languages.Natural Language Semantics, 6 (4), 339-405.
8. Chomsky, N., (1995).The Minimalist Program.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Chomsky, N., (2000).New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. Cimpian, A., (2010).The impact of generic language about ability on children's achievement motivation.Developmental Psychology, 46 (5), 1333-1340.
11. Cimpian, A., Bian, L., &, Sutherland, S., (submitted).The origins of children's beliefs about achievement: Thinking about the abilities of groups causes 4-year-olds to devalue effort.
12. Cimpian, A., Brandone, A.C., &, Gelman, S.A., (2010).Generic statements require little evidence for acceptance but have powerful implications.Cognitive Science, 34 (8), 1452-1482.
13. Cimpian, A., &, Markman, E.M., (2009).Information learned from generic language becomes central to children's biological concepts: Evidence from their open-ended explanations.Cognition, 113 (1), 14-25.
14. Cimpian, A., &, Markman, E.M., (2011).The generic/nongeneric distinction influences how children interpret new information about social others.Child Development, 82 (2), 471-492.
15. Cimpian, A., Mu, Y., &, Erickson, L.C., (2012).Who is good at this game? Linking an activity to a social category undermines children's achievement.Psychological Science, 23 (5), 533-541.
16. Cohen, A., (1996).Think Generic: The Meaning and Use of Generic Sentences.Ph.D.dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University.
17. Cohen, A., (2004).Generics and Mental Representation.Linguistics and Philosophy, 27 (5), 529-556.
18. Cohen, A., (2007).The Information Structure of Bare Plurals in English and Italian.In, K.Schwabe, and, S.Winkler, (eds.) On Information Structure, Meaning, and Form.Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
19. Evans, G., (1977).Pronouns, Quantifiers and Relative Clauses (I).Canadian Journal of Philosophy VIII, 3, 467-536.
20. Gelman, S.A., (2003) The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought.New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Gelman, S.A., (2010).Generics as a window onto young children's concepts.In, F.J.Pelletier, (ed.).Kinds, Things, and Stuff.New York: Oxford University Press., pp.100-123.
22. Gelman, S.A., &, Bloom, P., (2007).Developmental changes in the understanding of generics.Cognition, 105, 166-183.
23. Greenberg, Y., (2003).Manifestations of Genericity.New York: Routledge.
24. Groenendijk, J., &, Stokhof, M., (1988).Type-shifting Rules and the Semantics of Interrogatives.In, G.Chierchia, B.Partee, and, R.Turner, (eds.), Properties, Types, and Meanings, vol II.Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp.21-69.
25. Haslanger, S., (2011).Ideology, Generics, and Common Ground.In, Charlotte Witt, ed., Feminist Metaphysics: Explorations in the Ontology of Sex, Gender, and the Self.Dordrecht: Springer, pp.179-209.
26. Heim, I., (1982).The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases.Ph.D.dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
27. Heim, I., (1990).E-type Pronouns and Donkey Anaphora.Linguistics and Philosophy, 13, 137-177.
28. Hollander, M.A., Gelman, S.A., &, Star, J., (2002) Children's interpretation of generic noun phrases.Developmental Psychology, 38, 883-894.
29. Jaeger, T.F., &, Tily, H., (2011).On language 'utility': Processing complexity and communicative efficiency.Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2 (3), 323-335.
30. Johnston, M., &, Leslie, S.J., (2012).Concepts, Analysis, Generics, and the Canberra Plan.Philosophical Perspectives, 26, 113-171.
31. Kamp, H., (1981).A theory of truth and semantic interpretation.In, J.Groenendijk, J.Janssen, and, M.Stokhof, (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language.Dordrecht: Forts Publications, pp.277-322.
32. Kamp, H., and, Reyle, U., 1993, From Discourse to Logic.Dordrect: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
33. King, J., (2005).Anaphora.Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
34. Krifka, M., Pelletier, F.J., Carlson, G.N., ter Meulen, A., Chierchia, G., &, Link, G., (1995).Genericity: An Introduction.In, G.N.Carlson, and, F.J.Pelletier, (eds.) The Generic Book.Chicago: Chicago University Press.
35. Lasersohn, P., (1997).Bare Plurals and Donkey Anaphora.Natural Language Semantics, 5 (1), 79-86.
36. Lawler, J., (1973).Studies in English generics.University of Michigan Papers in Linguistics 1 (1).
37. Leslie, S.J., (2007).Generics and the Structure of the Mind.Philosophical Perspectives, 21 (1), 375-403.
38. Leslie, S.J., (2008) Generics: Cognition and Acquisition.Philosophical Review, 117 (1), 1-47.
39. Leslie, S.J., (2012).Generics Articulate Default Generalizations.Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 41, 25-45.
40. Leslie, S.J., (in press a).Hillary Clinton is the Only Man in the Obama Administration: Dual Character Concepts, Generics, and Gender.Analytic Philosophy.
41. Leslie, S.J., (in press b).The Original Sin of Cognition: Fear, Prejudice, and Generalization.The Journal of Philosophy.
42. Leslie, S.J., (in press c).Carving Up the Social World with Generics.Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy.
43. Leslie, S.J., &, Gelman, S.A., (2012).Quantified Statements are Recalled as Generics: Evidence from Preschool Children and Adults.Cognitive Psychology, 64, 186-214.
44. st Annual Cognitive Science Society.Amsterdam: Cognitive Science Society.
45. Leslie, S.J., Khemlani, S., &, Glucksberg, S., (2011).All Ducks Lay Eggs: The Generic Overgeneralization Effect.Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 15-31.
46. Liebesman, D., (2011).Simple Generics.Noûs, 45 (3), 409-442.
47. Lewis, D., (1975).Adverbs of Quantification.In, E.L.Keenan, (ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.3-15.
48. Mannheim, B., Gelman, S.A., Escalante, C., Huayhua, M., &, Puma, R., (2011).A developmental analysis of generic nouns in Southern Peruvian Quechua.Language Learning and Development, 7 (1), 1-23.
49. May, R., (1985).Logical Form.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50. rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.Boston, MA: Cognitive Science Society.
51. McConnell-Ginet, S., (2012).Generic Predicates and Interest Relativity.The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 57 (2), 261-287.
52. Neale, S., (1990).Descriptions.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
53. Partee, B.H., (1987).Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-Shifting Principles.In, J.Groenendijk, D.de Jongh, and, M.Stokhof, (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers.Dordrecht: Foris Publications, pp.115-145.
54. Pelletier, F.J., &, Asher, N., (1997).Generics and Defaults.In, J.van Benthem, and, A.ter Meulen, (eds.) Handbook of Logic and Language.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.1125-1179.
55. Postal, P., (1993).Remarks on Weak Crossover Effects.Linguistic Inquiry, 24 (3), 539-556.
56. Prasada, S., &, Dillingham, E.M., (2006).Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception.Cognition, 99, 73-112.
57. Prasada, S., &, Dillingham, E.M., (2009).Representation of principled connections: A window onto the formal aspect of common sense conception.Cognitive Science, 33, 401-48.
58. Prasada, S., Khemlani, S., Leslie, S.J., &, Glucksberg, S., (2013).Conceptual distinctions amongst generics.Cognition, 126 (3), 405-422.
59. Rhodes, M., Leslie, S.J., &, Tworek, C., (2012).Cultural transmission of social essentialism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 109, 13526-13531.
60. Tardif, T., Gelman, S.A., Fu, X., &, Zhu, L., (2011).Acquisition of generic noun phrases in Chinese: Learning about lions without an "-s".Journal of Child Language, 30, 1-32.
61. ter Meulen, A., (1995).Semantic Constraints on Type-Shifting Anaphora.In, G.N.Carlson, and, F.J.Pelletier, (eds.) The Generic Book.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp.339-358.
62. Wilkinson, K., (1991).Studies in the Semantics of Generic Noun Phrases.Ph.D.thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
63. Wilkinson, K., (1995).The Semantics of the Common Noun Kind.In, G.N.Carlson, and, F.J.Pelletier, (eds.) The Generic Book.Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp.383-398.