Modelling the Use of Quantifiers in Typical and Atypical Speakers Probabilistically

对表达量化的词的研究（例如，自亚里士多德的著作以来，哲学家、语言学家、逻辑学家和心理学家一直在研究这个问题。形式语义学中目前的共识是，许多或大多数量化表达式表示广义量词，即，集合之间的关系，具有明确定义但通常逻辑上较弱的含义。然而，来自心理学实验的关于量词使用和解释的证据表明了一个完全不同的图景。例如，实验中的参与者会从“一些A是B”中推断出大约四分之一的A是B，而不是像通常的“一些”语义所暗示的那样，至少有一个A。我们把实验数据中观察到的这些窄范围称为“焦点范围”。此外，量词的焦点范围，如实验数据所证实的，通常没有精确的特征，但可能有一个模糊和难以捉摸的周长。尽管如此，量词的使用和解释仍然存在，因此本项目的主要目标是在量词使用和解释的形式语义学和心理数据之间建立一座桥梁。我们的做法是务实的。我们推测，语言学理论和实验数据之间的明显差异可以通过语用学来解决，我们可以使用量词使用的研究来理解一般的语用原则。相关的原则至关重要，包括进一步相关的认知因素，如不精确和错误的感知和处理的数量，不确定性的对话者的词汇，不确定性的上下文相关水平所需的精度，并限制在何种程度上语言使用者能够或愿意从事心理理论推理收敛到最佳的语言使用。由于这样一个心理丰富的图片可以很快变得笨拙，我们将利用数据驱动的概率建模，根据最近的博弈论和贝叶斯方法。从经验上讲，这个项目开始系统地收集数据，从一个统一的家庭的任务测量的生产和量化表达式的解释。我们特别感兴趣的是潜在的不对称之间的扬声器生产和听众的理解，以及在动态调整过程中重复的扬声器-听众互动。此外，我们不仅将招募神经典型的成年人，还将招募神经典型的儿童和患有自闭症谱系障碍的成年人。后两组都被称为经历务实的赤字。通过收集数据，使用统一的刺激和任务类型在静态或动态设置从这些不同的人群，我们将能够测试，使用明确的概率模型，现存的理论帐户的语用能力的儿童和成人自闭症谱系障碍。

The study of words that express quantification (e.g., some, most) has occupied philosophers, linguists, logicians, and psychologists since the work of Aristotle. The current consensus in formal semantics is that many or most quantifying expressions denote generalised quantifiers, i.e., relations between sets, with clearly defined but usually logically weak meanings. Evidence from psychological experiments on quantifier use and interpretation, however, suggests a rather different picture. For example, participants in experiments would infer from Some A are B that about a quarter of the A are B, rather than at least one A, as the usual semantic denotation of `some' implies. We call these narrow ranges observed in experimental data `focal ranges'. Moreover, a quantifier's focal range, as attested by experimental data, is usually not precisely characterised but may have a vague and elusive circumference. Still, regularities in quantifier use and interpretation persist, and so the main goal of this project is to build a bridge between formal semantics and psychological data of quantifier use and interpretation. Our approach is pragmatic. We conjecture that apparent discrepancies between linguistic theory and experimental data can be resolved by pragmatics and that we can use the study of quantifier use to understand general pragmatic principles. The relevant principles crucially include further relevant cognitive factors, such as imprecision and error in the perception and processing of quantity, uncertainty about an interlocutor's lexicon, uncertainty about contextually relevant levels of required precision, and limits on the extent to which language users are able or willing to engage in theory of mind reasoning to converge on optimal language use. Since such a psychologically rich picture can grow unwieldy very soon, we will make use of data-driven probabilistic modeling, following recent game-theoretic and Bayesian approaches.Empirically, this project sets out to systematically collect data from a uniform family of tasks gauging the production and interpretation of quantifying expressions. We are specifically interested in potential asymmetries between speaker production and listener comprehension, as well as in dynamic alignment processes in repeated speaker-listener interaction. Moreover, we will recruit not only neurotypical adults, but also neurotypical children and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Both of these latter groups are known to experience pragmatic deficits. By collecting data using uniform stimuli and task types in static or dynamic settings from these different populations, we will be able to test, using explicit probabilistic modeling, extant theoretical accounts of the pragmatic abilities of children and adults with autism spectrum disorder.