Negative polarity illusions are robust with both ‘ever’ and ‘any’ (when linear position is held constant)

Many studies have used linguistic illusions to probe the representations and mechanisms used during incremental language comprehension. A crucial component of this research program is mapping out when illusions occur and when they do not. To this end, we investigate the generality of a linguistic illusion observed with negative polarity items (NPIs). Most previous work has only investigated the illusion using a single NPI, ever (or its analogue in other languages), but all models of the illusion phenomenon implicitly predict that illusions should generalize across different NPIs. In apparent contradiction to this prediction Parker and Phillips (2016) found reliable illusions with ever, but not with the previously untested NPI any. In their original paper, the authors suggested that the asymmetry stemmed from differences in the linear position of the two NPIs in their test items. However, the authors did not establish the basic empirical generalization that any is, in fact, susceptible to the illusion when the confound of linear position is factored out. As such, their findings are equally compatible with the hypothesis that there is fine-grained lexical variation in inherent susceptibility to the illusion, which would have serious implications for all theories of the phenomenon. To settle the empirical record, we conducted a higher-power study comparing ever and any using items adapted from Parker and Phillips (2016) such that the two NPIs occupied the same ordinal position in their test sentences. We find comparable illusions for both NPIs, a welcome result for all candidate theories of the phenomenon and consistent with the distance-based explanation for its absence in Parker and Phillips (2016).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cognition
Published
2025-09-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106295
Primary Topic
Optical and Acousto-Optic Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Negative polarity illusions are robust with both ‘ever’ and ‘any’ (when linear position is held constant)

Dave Kush, Aman Khurana, Michael Wu
Cognition
Optical and Acousto-Optic Technologies
article

Negative polarity illusions are robust with both ‘ever’ and ‘any’ (when linear position is held constant)

Dave Kush, Aman Khurana, Michael Wu
article en

Abstract

Many studies have used linguistic illusions to probe the representations and mechanisms used during incremental language comprehension. A crucial component of this research program is mapping out when illusions occur and when they do not. To this end, we investigate the generality of a linguistic illusion observed with negative polarity items (NPIs). Most previous work has only investigated the illusion using a single NPI, ever (or its analogue in other languages), but all models of the illusion phenomenon implicitly predict that illusions should generalize across different NPIs. In apparent contradiction to this prediction Parker and Phillips (2016) found reliable illusions with ever, but not with the previously untested NPI any. In their original paper, the authors suggested that the asymmetry stemmed from differences in the linear position of the two NPIs in their test items. However, the authors did not establish the basic empirical generalization that any is, in fact, susceptible to the illusion when the confound of linear position is factored out. As such, their findings are equally compatible with the hypothesis that there is fine-grained lexical variation in inherent susceptibility to the illusion, which would have serious implications for all theories of the phenomenon. To settle the empirical record, we conducted a higher-power study comparing ever and any using items adapted from Parker and Phillips (2016) such that the two NPIs occupied the same ordinal position in their test sentences. We find comparable illusions for both NPIs, a welcome result for all candidate theories of the phenomenon and consistent with the distance-based explanation for its absence in Parker and Phillips (2016).

CognitionVol. 266
University of Toronto (CA), Scarborough Health Network (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Optical and Acousto-Optic Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.