Japanese-speaking Children’s Absolute Interpretation of Differential Comparatives and Differential
Verbal Expressions
Tomoe Arii (University of Tokyo/ JSPS Research Fellow)

It has been observed that children interpret a differential comparative like (1) in a non-adult-like way ([1]).
For example, when a boy has three pineapples and a girl has one, (1) is true under adult’s interpretation. On theother hand, many 5- and 6-year-olds judge that (1) is false, saying the boy has not two but three pineapples.
That is, they interpret the comparative as absolute, i.e. the boy has two pineapples. In order to pin down thesource of children’s difficulty in interpreting a differential comparative, this paper investigatesJapanese-speaking 5-to-6-year-olds’ interpretation of a differential verbal expression like (2). A differential
comparative and a differential verbal expression have similar constructions but while the former describes thedifference between two sets, the latter describes the change of a set. Considering the claim of [2] that children
can more easily solve a change problem, where things are added or taken away, than a comparative problem,
we can expect that children can interpret a differential verbal expression more appropriately than a differential
comparative. However, an experiment reveals that children also interpret a differential verbal expression as
absolute.
Previous studies have reported that English-speaking children also interpret a differential comparative as
absolute (cf.[3], [4]). [2] argues that the source of children’s non-adult-like interpretation is static comparison
expressed with a differential comparative. According to [2], children’s initial conceptions of addition andsubtraction are based on increasing or decreasing a quantity. So, children can easily solve a change problem(e.g. John has three apples and eats one of them. How many apples are left?), where things are added or taken
away and they can understand what actions they need to carry out to solve it. On the other hand, in acomparison problem (e.g. John has three apples and one orange. How many more apples does he have thanoranges?) nothing has changed. The connection between the situation and an arithmetic operation on symbolic
objects that is required to solve it is not clear. [2] argues that this unclear connection causes their non-adult-likeinterpretation.
If the argument of [2] can explain their absolute interpretation of a differential comparative, children
should be able to appropriately interpret a differential verbal expression like (2). A differential comparative anda differential verbal expression have similar constructions but while the former describes the difference
between two sets, the latter describes the change of a set. If children’s absolute interpretation of a differential
comparative is due to their immature cognitive resources required to deal with the difference between two sets,
they should be able to interpret a differential verbal expression more easily because it describes the change of aset.
In order to examine children’s interpretation of the two constructions, an experiment was conducted on 15
Japanese-speaking children (5;4-6;3, mean age: 6;0). A within-subject design was adopted and the samechildren’s interpretation of them was investigated at intervals of more than a week. In one typical trial, aparticipant was presented with a boy and a girl with a mysterious box. The boy and the girl each have apineapple and they put it into their own box. Opening the girl’s box reveals one pineapple and nothing haschanged. Then, a puppet makes a prediction about the boy’s pineapple, saying (1) or (2). Opening the boy’s
box reveals three pineapples. The puppet’s statement is true under the adult interpretation of (1) and (2)because the boy has two more pineapples than the girl and the number of the boy’s pineapples has increased bytwo. If a child participant assigns absolute interpretation to (1) and (2), i.e. the boy has two pineapples, heshould reject the puppet’s statement. As a result, children interpreted (1) as absolute 72.5% (98/135) of the timeand interpreted (2) as absolute 57.8% (78/135) of the time, as shown in Figure 1. Analyzing the data with aWilcoxon Signed Rank test, we find that there is no significant difference between the rate of children’sabsolute responses to them (p= .156 > .05). The number of absolute responses of an individual child isrepresented in Figure 2. Analyzing the data with Spearman’s rank correlation, children’s absolute responses tothe two constructions are correlated (r= .739). That is, children who interpret a differential verbal expression as
absolute always interpret a differential comparative as absolute.
The experiment has revealed that children interpret a differential verbal expression as absolute on thesame degree as a differential comparative. The expectation that children should be able to interpret a
differential verbal expression more easily than a differential comparative has been disconfirmed. Therefore,
whatever properties of the two constructions cause their absolute interpretation, we can conclude that theirabsolute interpretation is not specific to static comparison expressed with a differential comparative because
they also interpret a differential verbal expression as absolute.
(796 words)(1) Otokonoko-no painappuru-wa ni-koooi.
(Differential Comparative)
boy-GEN
pineapple-TOP two-CL more
‘The boy has two more pineapples.’(2) Otokonoko-no painappuru-wa ni-ko
fue-ta.
(Differential Verbal Expression)
boy-GEN
pineapple-TOP two-CL increase-PERFECT‘The number of the boy’s pineapples has increased by two.’
100%
80%
60%
40%

72.5%

57.8%

20%
0%

Comparative (1)Verbal (2)subject

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

age

6;3

6;3

6;2

6;2

6;1

6;1

6;1

5;11

5;11

5;10 5;10 5;8

5;4

5;4

5;4

Comparative

8/9

9/9

0/9

9/9

8/9

4/9

0/9

0/9

9/9

7/9

9/9

9/9

9/9

9/9

8/9

Verbal

1/9

9/9

0/9

0/9

8/9

0/9

0/9

0/9

9/9

8/9

7/9

9/9

9/9

9/9

9/9

[1] Arii, T. (2012) “Children’s Absolute Interpretation of Japanese Numeral Classifier Phrase Comparatives,” GLOW inAsia IX, Mie University, September 4, 2012. [2] Nunes, T. and P. Bryant (1996) Children Doing Mathematics,Blackwell, Oxford, UK. [3] Hudson, T. (1983) “Correspondences and Numerical Differences between DisjointSets,” Child Development, 54, 8490. [4] Riely, Mary S., James G. Greeno and Joan I. Heller (1983) “TheDevelopment of Children’s Problem Solving Ability in Arithmetic,” The Development of MathematicalThinking, ed. by Herbert P. Ginsburg, Academic Press, New York.