Scholarlink

<p>Classifiers, as a reference-tracking device of nouns, have caught much research attention over the past two decades. Beyond their grammatical function, classifiers are unique in their semantic association with the internal properties of head nouns, which raises questions about the relationship between language and cognition. Previous research reported a classifier effect (e.g., Saalbach and Imai in Lang Cogn Processes 27(3):381–428, 2012; Speed et al. in J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cogn 7(4):625–640, 2021), with classifier speakers (vs. non-classifier speakers) showing greater sensitivity to parameters such as animacy, shape and function. This study thus further testified the classifier effect through a fine-grained similarity judgement task. Chinese speakers (<i>N</i> = 41) rated significantly lower than English speakers (<i>N</i> = 41) in taxonomic pairs, but not in thematic, classifier or filler pairs. Subset analysis of taxonomic pairs revealed disparities in conceptual saliency, with animacy most salient, followed by function and shape. Meanwhile, both groups rated thematic pairs highest, followed by taxonomic, classifier and filler pairs. Chinese speakers also needed longer response time in each pair condition. Findings together suggested an implicit classifier effect in Chinese speakers, but classifier relation itself was not the predominant parameter guiding object perception.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Classifier Effect Masked by Taxonomic Relations: Through the Lens of a Similarity Judgment Task

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月5日

查看全文
  • Jiahuan Zhang

摘要

Classifiers, as a reference-tracking device of nouns, have caught much research attention over the past two decades. Beyond their grammatical function, classifiers are unique in their semantic association with the internal properties of head nouns, which raises questions about the relationship between language and cognition. Previous research reported a classifier effect (e.g., Saalbach and Imai in Lang Cogn Processes 27(3):381–428, 2012; Speed et al. in J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cogn 7(4):625–640, 2021), with classifier speakers (vs. non-classifier speakers) showing greater sensitivity to parameters such as animacy, shape and function. This study thus further testified the classifier effect through a fine-grained similarity judgement task. Chinese speakers (N = 41) rated significantly lower than English speakers (N = 41) in taxonomic pairs, but not in thematic, classifier or filler pairs. Subset analysis of taxonomic pairs revealed disparities in conceptual saliency, with animacy most salient, followed by function and shape. Meanwhile, both groups rated thematic pairs highest, followed by taxonomic, classifier and filler pairs. Chinese speakers also needed longer response time in each pair condition. Findings together suggested an implicit classifier effect in Chinese speakers, but classifier relation itself was not the predominant parameter guiding object perception.