Determiners are "conservative" because their meanings are not relations: evidence from verification

Quantificational determiners have meanings that are "conservative" in the following sense: sentences, repeating a determiner's internal argument within its external is logically insignificant. Using verification task to probe which sets (or properties) of entities represented when participants evaluate we test predictions three potential explanations for cross-linguistic yet substantive conservativity constraint. According "lexical restriction" views, words like every express relations exhibited by pairs sets, but only some these can be expressed with determiners. An "interface filtering" view retains relational conception determiner meanings, while replacing appeal lexical filters (on relevant type) special rules interpreting combination quantificational expression (Det NP) syntactic context and ban on lead triviality. The contrasting idea "ordered predication" don't genuine relations. Instead, second provides scope monadic quantifier, first selects domain quantifier: sequences respect it evaluated. On this view, two arguments each different logical status, suggesting they might psychological status as well. We find evidence case: When evaluating sentences big circle blue, mentally group things specified (e.g., circles) not blue things) or intersection both circles). These results suggest phenomenon due ordered predication.