Abstract
Modal adjectives (e.g., “possible” and “probable”) have been the subject of much discussion by linguists and logicians. For ordinary speakers, it was found that an important aspect of the meaning of modal adjectives is that they can all be used to qualify the truth of a statement: Subjects sorted modal adjectives according to similarity of meaning and then ordered the same adjectives solely according to their degree of qualification. The sorting data yielded a one-dimensional scaling solution of low stress that correlated highly with the results from the ordering task. Using the same techniques, negation was found to translate a modal adjective down the scale of qualification (e.g., “improbable” is more qualifying than “probable”) so that the order of affirmative adjectives with respect to each other is preserved for the corresponding negated adjectives. Negation in this domain is more analogous to a subtractive, rather than multiplicative, process. Also, affixal negation, as in “improbable” was consistently found to be more qualifying than lexical negation, as in “not probable.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Clark, H. Semantics and comprehension, In T. A. Seboek (Ed.),Current trends in linguistics (Vol. 12):Linguistics and adjacent arts and sciences. The Hague: Mouton, 1972.
Clark, H., &Clark, E.Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.
Cliff, N. Adverbs as multipliers.Psychological Review, 1959,66, 27–44.
Falmagne, R. J.Reasoning: Representation and process. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1975.
Hersh, H., &Caramazza, A. A fuzzy set approach to modifiers and vagueness in natural language.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1976,105, 254–276.
Holyoak, K., &Glass, A. Recognition confusions among quantifiers.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1978,17, 249–264.
Holyoak, K., &Walker, J. Subjective magnitude information in semantic orderings.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1976,15, 287–299.
Hughes, G., &Cresswell, M.An introduction to modal logic. London: Methuen, 1974.
Jespersen, O.The philosophy of grammar. London: Allen & Unwin, 1929.
Leech, G.Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974.
Lyons, J.Semantics (Vol. 2). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
Miller, G. A. Empirical methods in the study of semantics. In D. D. Steinberg & L. A. Jakobovits (Eds.),Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics, and psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1971.
Miller, G. A., &Johnson-Laird, P. N.Language and perception. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1976.
Revlis, R. Syllogistic reasoning: Logical decisions from a complex data base. In R. J. Falmagne (Ed.),Reasoning: Representation and process. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1975. or]Standard College Dictionary. New York: Funk and Wagnall’s Harper and Row, 1977.
Taplin, J., &Staudenmayer, H. Interpretation of abstract conditional sentences in deductive reasoning.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 530–542. or]Young, F., & Togerson, R. Torsca. A Fortran IV program for Kruskal-Shepard multidimensional scaling.Behavioral Science, 1967,
Zadeh, L. Fuzzy sets.Information and Control, 1965,8, 338–353.
Zimmer, K. Affixal negation in English and other languages: An investigation of restricted productivity. Supplement toWord, 1964,20(Whole No. 5), 1–105.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by Grant BNS 77-11612 from the National Science Foundation to Rockfeller University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reyna, V.F. The language of possibility and probability: Effects of negation on meaning. Mem Cogn 9, 642–650 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202359
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202359