Generics license 30-month-olds’ inferences about the atypical properties of novel kinds.

Abstract

We examined whether the distinction between generic and nongeneric language provides toddlers with a rapid and efficient means to learn about kinds. In Experiment 1, we examined 30-month-olds’ willingness to extend atypical properties to members of an unfamiliar category when the properties were introduced in one of three ways: a) using a generic noun phrase (“Blicks drink ketchup”); b) using a nongeneric noun phrase (“These blicks drink ketchup”); and c) using an attentional phrase (“Look at this”). Hearing a generic noun phrase boosted toddlers’ extension of properties to both the model exemplars and to novel members of the same category, relative to when a property had been introduced with a nongeneric noun phrase or an attentional phrase. In Experiment 2, properties were introduced with a generic noun phrase and toddlers extended novel properties to members of the same-category, but not to an out-of-category object. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that generics highlight the stability of a feature and foster generalization of the property to novel within-category exemplars.

Generic language in scientific communication

“…First, generic language in scientific articles may lead readers to reach exaggerated conclusions. Past research found that generic sentences implied that a property was broadly true (28,35,45,46) and conceptually central (37,38), and that the category expressed was stable with inherent properties (41,47). In the present work, studies 2 to 4 similarly revealed that both online workers and undergraduates studying psychology judged research summaries with generic language to be more important than nongeneric summaries, and under certain circumstances to be more generalizable and conclusive.…”

“…In studies 3a to 3d, we sought to replicate and extend the findings of study 2 by testing a broader range of linguistic cues to nongenericity. Language can signal nongenericity in a rich variety of ways, and most prior research has provided a starker contrast between generic and nongeneric than was provided in study 2 (28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35). For example, whereas study 2 only manipulated tense, in the published literature, nongenerics typically manipulated the noun phrase itself (e.g., "This X. .…”

How language shapes the cultural inheritance of categories

“…Preschool children appreciate both these points (46,58). Moreover, hearing novel generics about novel categories leads to more within-category inferences (36,112), assumption of core features (57), and essentialist inferences about that category, above and beyond labeling per se (108,109).…”

“…As soon as children master the syntactic prerequisites for expressing generics in their language (e.g., in English: plurals, articles, and tense), they produce generics ("Does lions crawl? "; "I don't like babies that cry"), comprehend generics as kind-referring and distinct from specific reference, and recall whether information was provided using generic or specific language (35)(36)(37). Generics have been attested in all documented languages, including pidgins and Pirahã (38-42).…”

Development of Conceptual Flexibility in Intuitive Biology: Effects of Environment and Experience

“…For example, children as young as 2.5 years of age rely on taxonomic relations (e.g., birds) when projecting potentially shared properties (e.g., lives in a nest; Gelman and Coley, 1990). Indeed, even 14-16 month old infants' use of labels suggests sensitivity to the importance of membership in taxonomic categories to guide inferences (Keates and Graham, 2008; see also Ferry et al, 2010;Graham et al, 2016;Switzer and Graham, 2017). This and other work (for reviews, see Coley et al, 2002;Coley and Muratore, 2012) suggest that taxonomic relations based on intrinsic, inherent similarities can be more salient for young children than thematic relations.…”