| 1 |
Stepmothers are mean and academics are pretentious: What do pretrained language models learn about you? ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Stepmothers are mean and academics are pretentious: What do pretrained language models learn about you? ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Experimenting with subject alternatives for analysing generic sentences
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 24 Nr. 1 (2020): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 24; 411-428 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 24 No 1 (2020): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 24; 411-428 ; 2629-6055 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
'Only': Meaning and Implicatures - The Very Incomplete Short Version
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 9 (2005): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 9; 314-324 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 9 (2005): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 9; 314-324 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Generic Sentences: Representativeness or causality?
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 23 Nr. 2 (2019): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 23; 409-426 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 23 No 2 (2019): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 23; 409-426 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
How to donkey FC- and NPI-any
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 11 (2007): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11; 479-493 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 11 (2007): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11; 479-493 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Generics and typicality
|
|
|
|
In: Sinn und Bedeutung; Bd. 22 Nr. 2 (2018): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 22; 443-461 ; Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung; Vol 22 No 2 (2018): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 22; 443-461 ; 2629-6055 (2019)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Generics and typicality ...
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Cimpian et al. (2010) observed that we accept generic statements of the form ‘Gs are f ’ on relatively weak evidence, but that if we are unfamiliar with group G and we learn a generic statement about it, we still interpret it in a much stronger way: (almost) all Gs are f . This paper makes use of notions like ‘representativeness’ and ‘contingency’ from (associative learning) psychology to provide a semantics of generics that explains why people accept generics based on weak evidence. We make use of the Heuristics and Biases approach of Tversky and Kahneman (1974) and the Associative Theory of Probability Judgements to explain pragmatically why people interpret generic statements in a much stronger way. The spirit of the approach has much in common with Leslie’s (2008) cognition-based ideas about generics, but the semantics is grounded on Cohen’s (1999) relative readings of generic sentences. The basic intuition is that a generic of the form ‘Gs are f ’ is true, not because most Gs are (or tend to have) f , ... : ZAS Papers in Linguistics, Bd. 61 (2018): Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 22, 2 ...
|
|
URL: https://zaspil.leibniz-zas.de/article/view/506
https://dx.doi.org/10.21248/zaspil.61.2018.506
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 13 |
Vagueness in Communication : International Workshop, VIC 2009, held as part of ESSLLI 2009, Bordeaux, France, July 20-24, 2009. Revised Selected Papers
|
|
|
|
UB Frankfurt Linguistik
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Strenghtening conditional presuppositions
|
|
|
|
In: Journal of Semantics 24 (2007), 289-304
|
|
IDS Konnektoren im Deutschen
|
|
|
| 19 |
Relevance of complex sentences
|
|
|
|
In: Mind and Manner (2006)
|
|
IDS Konnektoren im Deutschen
|
|
|
|
|
