Counting on number: effects of number information on grammatical processing of mass and count nouns

References

• Alario, F.-X., & Ferrand, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(3), 531–552. doi:10.3758/BF03200732
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Allan, K. (1980). Nouns and countability. Language, 56, 541–547. doi:10.2307/414449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Burani, C., & Schreuder, R. (1996). Effects of semantic markedness in the processing of regular nominal singulars and plurals in Italian. In G. E. Booij & J. V. Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1996 (pp. 14–34). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-3718-0_3
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Dijkstra, T., & Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 94–117. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2509
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Levelt, W. J. M., Schreuder, R., & Ernestus, M. (2008). Paradigmatic structure in speech production. Paper presented at the Chicago Linguistics Society, 43, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium. University of Pensylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & van Rijn, H. (1993). The CELEX lexical database (Release 1) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium. University of Pensylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–5. Retrieved from http://keziamanlove.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/StatsInRTutorial.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Beyersmann, E., Dutton, E. M., Amer, S., Schiller, N., & Biedermann, B. (2015). The production of singular-and plural-dominant nouns in Dutch. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(7), 867–876. doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1027236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biedermann, B., Beyersmann, E., Mason, C., & Nickels, L. (2013). Does plural dominance play a role in spoken picture naming? A comparison of unimpaired and impaired speakers. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26, 712–736. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2013.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biedermann, B., Lorenz, A., Beyersmann, E., & Nickels, L. (2012). The influence of plural dominance in aphasic word production. Aphasiology, 26(8), 985–1004. doi:10.1080/02687038.2012.660459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bisiacchi, P., Mondini, S., Angrilli, A., Marinelli, K., & Semenza, C. (2005). Mass and count nouns show distinct EEG cortical processes during an explicit semantic task. Brain and Language, 95, 98–99. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.07.054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chierchia, G. (1998). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339–405. doi:10.1023/A:1008324218506
   Google Scholar
• Cholin, J., Rapp, B., & Miozzo, M. (2010). When do combinatorial mechanisms apply in the production of inflected words? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 27, 334–359. doi:10.1080/02643294.2010.524467
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Database, 33, 497–505. doi:10.1080/14640748108400805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domahs, F., Nagels, A., Domahs, U., Whiteney, C., Wiese, R., & Kircher, T. (2012). Where the mass counts: Common cortical activation for different kinds of nonsingularity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 915–932. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eberhard, K. M., Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (2005). Making syntax of sense: Number agreement in sentence production. Psychological Review, 112(3), 531–558. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.3.531
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El Yagoubi, R., Mondini, S., Bisiacchi, P., Chiarelli, V., Angrilli, A., & Semenza, C. (2006). The electrophysiological basis of mass and count nouns processing. Brain and Language, 99, 8–219. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2006.06.108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fieder, N., Nickels, L., & Biedermann, B. (2014). Representation and processing of mass and count nouns: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–18. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00589
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fieder, N., Nickels, L., Biedermann, B., & Best, W. (2014). From “some butter” to “a butter”: An investigation of mass and count representation and processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 31(4), 313–349. doi:10.1080/02643294.2014.903914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fieder, N., Nickels, L., Biedermann, B., & Best, W. (2015). How “some garlic” becomes “a garlic” or “some onion”: Mass and count processing in aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 75, 626–645. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.06.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 116–124. doi:10.3758/BF03195503
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gastaldon, S., Zanini, C., Arcara, G., Peressotti, F., & Franzon, F. (2016). Referential numerosity and morphosyntactic number agreement: A psycholinguistic study on Italian Qualche/Alcuni. Research in Generative Grammar, 38, 105–113. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305608248
   Google Scholar
• Gilhooly, K. J., & Hay, D. (1977). Imagery, concreteness, age-of-acquisition, familiarity, and meaningfulness values for 205 five-letter words having single-solution anagrams. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 9(1), 12–17. doi:10.3758/BF03202210
   Google Scholar
• Gillon, B. S., Kehayia, E., & Taler, V. (1999). The mass/count distinction: Evidence from online psycholinguistic performance. Brain and Language, 68, 205–211. doi:10.1006/brln.1999.2081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbert, R., & Best, W. (2010). The role of noun syntax in spoken word production: Evidence from aphasia. Cortex, 46(3), 329–342. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.03.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard, D., Nickels, L., Coltheart, M., & Cole-virtue, J. (2006). Cumulative semantic inhibition in picture naming: Experimental and computational studies. Cognition, 100, 464–482. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krifka, M. (1995). Common nouns: A contrastive analysis of Chinese and English. In G. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (Eds.), The Generic Book (pp. 398–411). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2014). lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package): R package version 2.0-6. Retrieved from http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=lmerTest
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75. Retrieved from http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/pubman/item/escidoc:102470/component/escidoc:102471/Levelt_A_Theory_of_Lexical_Access_BBS_1999.pdf
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorenz, A., & Biedermann, B. (2015). Production of plural nouns in German: Evidence from agrammatic aphasia. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(7), 796–815. doi:10.1080/23273798.2015.1016442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luzzatti, C., Mondini, S., & Semenza, C. (2001). Lexical representation and processing of morphologically complex words: Evidence from the reading performance of an Italian agrammatic patient. Brain and Language, 79, 345–359. doi:10.1006/brln.2001.2475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondini, S., Angrilli, A., Bisiacchi, P., Spironelli, C., Marinelli, K., & Semenza, C. (2008). Mass and count nouns activate different brain regions: An ERP study on early components. Neuroscience Letters, 430, 48–53. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2007.10.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondini, S., Arcara, G., & Jarema, G. (2014). Semantic and syntactic processing of mass and count nouns: Data from dementia. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 36(9), 967–980. doi:10.1080/13803395.2014.958437
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondini, S., Kehayia, E., Gillon, B., Arcara, G., & Jarema, G. (2009). ). Lexical access of mass and count nouns. How word recognition reaction times correlate with lexical and morpho-syntactic processing. Mental Lexicon, 4(3), 354–379. doi:10.1075/ml.4.3.03mon
   Google Scholar
• Nickels, L., Biedermann, B., Fieder, N., & Schiller, N. O. (2015). The lexical-syntactic representation of number. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(3), 287–304. doi:10.1080/23273798.2013.879191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., & Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 76(1), Part 2, 1–25. doi:10.1037/h0025327
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Quirk, R., & Greenbaum, S. (1973). A university grammar of English. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing: R package version 1.1–5. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, S. (2010). Counting and the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics, 27, 343–397. doi:10.1093/jos/ffq007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semenza, C., Mondini, S., & Cappelletti, M. (1997). The grammatical properties of mass nouns: An aphasia case study. Neuropsychologia, 35(5), 669–675. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(96)00124-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semenza, C., Mondini, S., & Marinelli, K. (2000). Count and mass nouns: Semantics and syntax in aphasia and Alzheimer’s disease. Brain and Language, 74, 395–431. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2370
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinhauer, K., Pancheva, R., Newman, A. J., Gennari, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2001). How the mass counts: An electrophysiological approach to the processing of lexical features. Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology, 12(5), 999–1005. Retrieved from https://brainlang.georgetown.edu/sites/brainlang/files/documents/steinhauer_neuroreport_01_1.pdf
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taler, V., & Jarema, G. (2007). Lexical access in younger and older adults: The case of the mass/count distinction. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 21–34. doi:10.1037/cjep2007003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Martin, R. C., & Garrett, M. F. (1999). Is “count” and “mass” information available when the noun is not? An investigation of tip of the tongue states and anomia. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 534–558. doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wisniewski, E. J., Lamb, C. A., & Middleton, E. L. (2003). On the conceptual basis for the count and mass noun distinction. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(5/6), 583–624. doi:10.1080/01690960344000044
   Google Scholar
• Zanini, C., Benavides-Varela, S., Lorusso, R., & Franzon, F. (2016). Mass is more: The conceiving of (un)countability and its encoding into language in 5-year-old-children. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–11. doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1187-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar