, The plural 'quiénes' would have a weak semantics, equivalent to 'which people' in English, and the plurality inference would arise by the competition with 'quién' SG in the relevant contexts. As long as this inference is an implicated presupposition, quiénesinterrogatives should be available whenever the singular alternative is not, namely in both more-than-one and ignorance scenarios. Hence, the distribution of 'quiénes' should be strictly 10. STRONG PLURALITY AND D-LINKING IN SPANISH INTERROGATIVES COMMON GROUND Exactly one person VP At least one person VP More than one person VP Which, that ranges only over atoms ( 'quién' SG ), and one that is neutral to semantic number

, Cuál/Qué persona VP? (SP) Cuáles/Qué personas VP? (SP)

V. P. Who, ) Quién VP? (SP) Quiénes VP? (SP)

, In (10), 'quién' proves to be better than 'quiénes' in this context, suggesting that the later is a stronger DP than the former. Establishing a connection between d-linking, on the one hand, and definiteness and existential import, on the other, might help capturing all these contrasts with an unique account. 10. STRONG PLURALITY AND D-LINKING IN SPANISH INTERROGATIVES Given that quiénes-interrogatives have stronger presuppositions than their singular alternative (cf. (13)), questions such as (15a) should be blocked. Nonetheless, these quién-interrogatives are actually preferred in non-d-linked contexts. A similar pattern arises when quantificational adverbs quantify over the embedded question (Quantificational Variability Effects, Quién (# quiénes) hay en la fiesta? Who.SG (# who.PL) was at the party? 'Who was there at the party?' (ii), 1991.

S. Spanish, This explains the distribution attested in examples such as (14) and (15)

C. Aguero-bautista, Cyclicity and the scope of wh-phrases (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 2001.

L. Alonso-ovalle and P. Menéndez-benito, Domain restrictions, modal implicatures and plurality: Spanish algunos, Journal of Semantics, vol.28, issue.2, pp.211-240, 2011.

C. Anderson, The structure and real-time comprehension of quantifier scope ambiguity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 2004.

R. H. Baayen, D. J. Davidson, and D. M. Bates, Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items, Journal of memory and language, vol.59, issue.4, pp.390-412, 2008.

D. J. Barr, R. Levy, C. Scheepers, and H. J. Tily, Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal, Journal of memory and language, vol.68, issue.3, pp.255-278, 2013.

D. Bates, R. Kliegl, S. Vasishth, and H. Baayen, Parsimonious mixed models, 2015.

D. Bates, M. Maechler, B. Bolker, and S. Walker, lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using eigen and s4, 2014.

F. Beghelli and T. Stowell, Distributivity and negation: The syntax of each and every, Ways of scope taking, pp.71-107, 1997.

S. R. Berman, On the semantics and logical form of wh-clauses, 1991.

K. Bock, Syntactic persistence in language production, Cognitive Psychology, vol.18, issue.3, pp.355-387, 1986.

K. Bock and H. Loebell, Framing sentences, Cognition, vol.35, issue.1, pp.1-39, 1990.

L. Bott and E. Chemla, Shared and distinct mechanisms in deriving linguistic enrichment, Journal of Memory and Language, vol.91, pp.117-140, 2016.

O. Bott and J. Radórad´radó, How to provide exactly one interpretation for every sentence, or what eye movements reveal about quantifier scope, The fruits of empirical linguistics, vol.1, pp.1-24, 2009.

H. Branigan and K. Messenger, Consistent and cumulative effects of syntactic experience in children's sentence production: Evidence for error-based implicit learning, Cognition, vol.157, pp.250-256, 2016.

H. Branigan and M. Pickering, Structural priming and the representation of language, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, p.40, 2017.

A. Brasoveanu and J. Dotla?il, Processing pluralities: Syntax and the lexicon. CUNY 28, 2015.

C. M. Brisson, Distributivity, maximality, and floating quantifiers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 1998.

P. J. Brooks and M. D. Braine, What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each?, Cognition, vol.60, issue.3, pp.235-268, 1996.

L. Champollion, Parts of a Whole: Distributivity as Bridge between Aspect and Measurement, pp.1-10, 2010.

L. Champollion, Covert distributivity in algebraic event semantics, 2014.

L. Champollion, Distributivity, collectivity, and cumulativity, REFERENCES, vol.134

. Wiley, L. Champollion, and M. Krifka, Cambridge handbook of semantics, 2014.

F. Chang, G. S. Dell, and K. Bock, An Epistemic Step for Anti-Presupposition, Psychological Review, vol.113, issue.2, pp.141-173, 2006.

E. Chemla and L. Bott, Processing inferences at the semantics/pragmatics frontier: Disjunctions and free choice, Cognition, vol.130, issue.3, pp.380-396, 2014.

E. Chemla and L. Bott, Using structural priming to study scopal representations and operations, Linguistic Inquiry, 2015.

G. Chierchia, Questions with quantifiers. Natural language semantics, vol.1, pp.181-234, 1993.

G. Chierchia, Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of 'semantic parameter, 1998.

G. Chierchia, D. Fox, B. Spector, and N. Chomsky, The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between syntax and semantics. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, Conditions on rules of grammar, vol.1, 1976.

N. Chomsky, A. Belletti, and L. Rizzi, An interview on minimalism, On Nature and Language, pp.92-161, 2002.

D. G. Clark and J. Kar, Bias of quantifier scope interpretation is attenuated in normal aging and semantic dementia, Journal of Neurolinguistics, vol.24, issue.4, pp.401-419, 2011.

H. H. Clark and W. G. Chase, On the process of comparing sentences against pictures, Cognitive psychology, vol.3, issue.3, pp.472-517, 1972.

I. Comorovski, Interrogative phrases and the syntax-semantics interface, vol.59, 2013.

R. Cooper, Quantification and syntactic theory, vol.21, 2013.

E. A. Cranford and J. Moss, Mouse-tracking evidence for parallel anticipatory option evaluation, Cognitive processing, pp.1-24, 2017.

P. W. Culicover and R. Jackendoff, Simpler syntax, 2005.

R. Dale and N. D. Duran, The Cognitive Dynamics of Negated Sentence Verification, Cognitive Science, vol.35, pp.983-996, 2011.

V. Dayal, Locality in wh quantification: questions and relative clauses in hindi, 1996.

J. Degen, Alternatives in pragmatic reasoning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), The semantics and pragmatics of plurals. Semantics and pragmatics, vol.3, pp.6-7, 2010.

F. C. Donders, On the speed of mental processes, Acta psychologica, vol.30, pp.412-431, 1969.

J. Dotlacil, Anaphora and distributivity: A study of same, different, reciprocals and others, 2010.

D. Dowty, Collective predicates, distributive predicates and all, Proceedings of the 3rd escol, pp.97-115, 1987.

U. Etxeberria, A. Giannakidou, T. Farmer, S. Cargill, N. C. Hindy et al., Tracking the continuity of language comprehension: computer mouse trajectories suggest parallel syntactic processing, Cognitive science, vol.6, pp.889-909, 2007.

R. Feiman and J. Snedeker, The logic in language: How all quantifiers are alike, but each quantifier is different, Cognitive Psychology, vol.87, pp.29-52, 2016.

V. S. Ferreira and K. Bock, The functions of structural priming. Language and cognitive REFERENCES processes, vol.21, pp.1011-1029, 2006.

R. Filik, K. B. Paterson, and S. P. Liversedge, Processing doubly quantified sentences: Evidence from eye movements, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol.11, issue.5, pp.953-959, 2004.

A. B. Fine, T. F. Jaeger, T. A. Farmer, and T. Qian, Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension, PloS one, vol.8, issue.10, 2013.

J. D. Fodor, The mental representation of quantifiers, Processes, beliefs, and questions, pp.129-164, 1982.

J. D. Fodor and I. A. Sag, Referential and quantificational indefinites, Linguistics and philosophy, vol.5, issue.3, pp.355-398, 1982.

D. Fox, Economy and semantic interpretation, vol.35, pp.82-123, 2000.

L. Frazier, On sentence interpretation, Springer Science & Business Media, vol.22, 1999.

L. Frazier, J. M. Pacht, and K. Rayner, Taking on semantic commitments, ii: collective versus distributive readings, Cognition, vol.70, issue.1, pp.87-104, 1999.

J. B. Freeman and N. Ambady, MouseTracker: software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behavior research methods, vol.42, pp.226-241, 2010.

J. B. Freeman, R. Dale, and T. A. Farmer, Hand in motion reveals mind in motion, Frontiers in Psychology, vol.2, pp.1-6, 2011.

J. B. Freeman and K. L. Johnson, More than meets the eye: split-second social perception, Trends in cognitive sciences, vol.20, issue.5, pp.362-374, 2016.

G. Frege, Function and concept. translated in m. black and p. geach. Translations of Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, pp.56-78, 1891.

D. Gil, Quantifier scope, linguistic variation, and natural language semantics, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol.5, issue.4, pp.421-472, 1982.

K. Gillen, The comprehension of doubly quantified sentences. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 1991.

B. S. Gillon, Ambiguity, indeterminacy, deixis and vagueness: evidence and theory, 2004.

L. Glass, An empirical investigation of distributivity, lexical semantics, & world knowledge, 2018.

L. Glass, Deriving the distributivity potential of adjectives via measurement theory, Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America, vol.3, pp.49-50, 2018.

P. Hagstrom, What questions mean, Glot International, vol.7, issue.7/8, pp.188-201, 2003.

C. L. Hamblin, Questions in montague english, Foundations of language, vol.10, issue.1, pp.41-53, 1973.

R. J. Hartsuiker and H. H. Kolk, Syntactic facilitation in agrammatic sentence production, Brain and Language, vol.62, issue.2, pp.221-254, 1998.

T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman, The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, 2009.

E. Hehman, R. M. Stolier, and J. B. Freeman, Advanced mouse-tracking analytic techniques for enhancing psychological science, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, pp.1-18, 2014.

I. Heim, File change semantics and the familiarity theory of definiteness, 1983.

I. Heim, Where does the definiteness restriction apply? evidence from the definiteness of variables. The representation of (in) definiteness, p.14, 1987.

I. Heim, Articles and definiteness. Semantics. An international handbook of contemporary research, 1991.

I. Heim and A. Kratzer, Semantics in generative grammar blackwell oxford google scholar, 1998.

I. Heim and K. Fintel, Lecture notes in advanced semantics, 2016.

N. Hornstein, Logic as grammar, 1984.

Y. T. Huang, E. Spelke, and J. Snedeker, What exactly do numbers mean?, Language Learning and Development, vol.9, issue.2, pp.105-129, 2013.

G. Ioup, Some universals for quantifier scope, Syntax and semantics 4, pp.37-58, 1995.

R. S. Jackendoff, Semantic interpretation in generative grammar, 1972.

T. F. Jaeger, Categorical data analysis: Away from anovas (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models, Journal of memory and language, vol.59, issue.4, pp.434-446, 2008.

T. F. Jaeger, Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density, Cognitive psychology, issue.1, pp.23-62, 2010.

T. F. Jaeger and N. E. Snider, Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime's prediction error given both prior and recent experience, Cognition, vol.127, issue.1, pp.57-83, 2013.

P. Johnson-laird, On understanding logically complex sentences, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.21, issue.1, pp.1-13, 1969.

H. Kamp, J. Van-genabith, and U. Reyle, Discourse representation theory, Handbook of philosophical logic, pp.125-394, 2011.

L. Karttunen, Syntax and semantics of questions, Linguistics and philosophy, vol.1, issue.1, pp.3-44, 1977.

B. Kaup, S. Kelter, and C. Habel, Representing referents of plural expressions and resolving plural anaphors, Language and Cognitive Processes, vol.17, issue.4, pp.405-450, 2002.

B. Kaup, R. H. Yaxley, C. J. Madden, R. A. Zwaan, and J. Udtke, Experiential simulations of negated text information, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.60, issue.7, pp.976-990, 2007.

C. Kennedy, Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison, 1999.

A. Kratzer, On the Plurality of Verbs. Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation, pp.269-300, 2005.

M. Krifka, Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution, Lexical matters, pp.29-53, 1992.

M. Krifka, Questions. Semantics: An international handbook of Natural Language Meaning, vol.2, pp.1742-1785, 2011.

M. Kri?, Aspects of homogeneity in the semantics of natural language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 2015.

G. R. Kuperberg and T. F. Jaeger, What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, vol.31, issue.1, pp.32-59, 2016.
DOI : 10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299
URL : http://europepmc.org/articles/pmc4850025?pdf=render

H. S. Kurtzman and M. C. Macdonald, Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities, Cognition, vol.48, issue.3, pp.243-279, 1993.
DOI : 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90042-t
URL : http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/~cebert/teaching/10Unterspezifikation/papers/Resolution of Quantifier Scope Ambiguities (Kurtzman+MacDonald).pdf

F. Landman, The handbook of contemporary semantic theory, pp.425-458, 1996.

F. Landman, Events and plurality, 2000.
DOI : 10.1007/978-94-011-4359-2

P. Lasersohn, On the readings of plural noun phrases, Linguistic inquiry, vol.20, issue.1, pp.130-134, 1989.

R. Levy, Expectation-based syntactic comprehension, Cognition, vol.106, issue.3, pp.1126-1177, 2008.
DOI : 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
URL : http://idiom.ucsd.edu/~rlevy/papers/levy-cognition-may-2007.pdf

J. Lidz and J. Musolino, Children's command of quantification, Cognition, vol.84, issue.2, pp.113-154, 2002.
DOI : 10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00013-6
URL : http://semantics.uchicago.edu/kennedy/classes/s09/experimentalsemantics/lidz-musolino02.pdf

G. Link, The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretical approach, pp.303-323, 1983.

G. Link, Generalized quantifiers and plurals, Generalized quantifiers, vol.31, pp.151-180, 1987.
DOI : 10.1007/978-94-009-3381-1_6

L. ¨-udtke, J. Friedrich, C. K. De-filippis, M. Kaup, and B. , Event-related potential correlates of negation in a sentence-picture verification paradigm, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol.20, issue.8, pp.1355-1370, 2008.

M. Maldonado, E. Chemla, and B. Spector, Priming plural ambiguities, Journal of Memory and Language, vol.95, pp.89-101, 2017.
DOI : 10.1016/j.jml.2017.02.002

M. Maldonado, B. Spector, and E. Chemla, Priming methods in semantics and pragmatics, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, p.40, 2017.
DOI : 10.1017/s0140525x17000516

L. Martí, The semantics of plural indefinite noun phrases in Spanish and Portuguese, Natural Language Semantics, vol.16, issue.1, pp.1-37, 2008.

P. Marty, E. Chemla, and B. Spector, Interpreting numerals and scalar items under memory load, Lingua, pp.152-163, 2011.
DOI : 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.03.006

P. Marty, E. Chemla, and B. Spector, Phantom readings: the case of modified numerals. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, vol.30, pp.462-477, 2014.
DOI : 10.1080/23273798.2014.931592

R. ;. May, . Mit, and R. May, The grammar of quantification. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Logical form: Its structure and derivation, vol.12, 1977.

D. E. Meyer and R. W. Schvaneveldt, Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations, Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.90, issue.2, p.227, 1971.

D. L. Micham, J. Catlin, N. J. Vanderveer, and K. A. Loveland, Lexical and structural cues to quantifier scope relations, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, vol.9, issue.4, pp.367-377, 1980.
DOI : 10.1007/bf01067449

G. L. Milsark, Existential sentences in english (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 1974.

R. Montague, English as a formal language, 1970.

R. Montague, Pragmatics and intensional logic, Semantics of natural language, pp.142-168, 1972.

J. Musolino, Universal grammar and the acquisition of semantic knowledge: An experimental investigation into the acquisition of quantifier-negation interaction in english, 1999.

J. Musolino, The logical syntax of number words: Theory, acquisition and processing, Cognition, vol.111, issue.1, pp.24-45, 2009.

M. Myslin and R. Levy, Comprehension priming as rational expectation for repetition: Evidence from syntactic processing, Cognition, vol.147, pp.29-56, 2016.

M. S. Nieuwland and G. R. Kuperberg, When the truth is not too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation, Psychological Science, vol.19, issue.12, pp.1213-1218, 2008.

M. Novel and M. Romero, Movement, variables and hamblin semantics, 2010.

K. B. Paterson, R. Filik, and S. P. Liversedge, Competition during the processing of quantifier scope ambiguities: Evidence from eye movements during reading, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.61, issue.3, pp.459-473, 2008.

N. D. Patson, The processing of plural expressions, Language and Linguistics Compass, vol.8, issue.8, pp.319-329, 2014.

N. D. Patson, G. George, and T. Warren, The conceptual representation of number, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.67, issue.7, pp.1349-1365, 2014.

N. D. Patson and T. Warren, Evidence for distributivity effects in comprehension, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, vol.36, issue.3, p.782, 2010.

O. Percus, Antipresuppositions. Theoretical and empirical studies of reference and anaphora: Toward the establishment of generative grammar as an empirical science, vol.52, p.73, 2006.

D. Pesetsky, Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. The representation of (in) definiteness, vol.98, pp.98-129, 1987.

S. T. Piantadosi, H. Tily, and E. Gibson, The communicative function of ambiguity in language, Cognition, vol.122, issue.3, pp.280-291, 2012.

M. J. Pickering and V. S. Ferreira, The syntax-semantics interface: On-line composition of sentence meaning, Handbook of psycholinguistics, vol.134, pp.539-579, 2006.

W. V. Quine, P. S. Churchland, and D. Føllesdal, , 1960.

. R-core-team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing, 2014.

A. ;. Vienna and M. J. Pickering, How do people construct logical form during language comprehension?, Psychological Science, vol.21, pp.1090-1097, 2010.

R. Ratcliff and G. Mckoon, The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks, Neural computation, vol.20, issue.4, pp.873-922, 2008.

A. Rees and L. Bott, The role of alternative salience in the derivation of scalar implicatures, Cognition, vol.176, pp.1-14, 2018.

T. Reinhart, Quantifier scope: How labor is divided between qr and choice functions, Linguistics and philosophy, vol.20, issue.4, pp.335-397, 1997.

J. Rett, Degree modification in natural language, 2008.

C. Roberts, Plural anaphors in distributive contexts, Proceedings of the 6th west coast conference on formal lingusitics. stanford: Csli, 1987.

H. Rullmann and S. Beck, Presupposition projection and the interpretation of'which'questions, Semantics and linguistic theory, vol.8, pp.215-232, 1998.

U. Sauerland, A new semantics for number, Semantics and linguistic theory, vol.13, pp.258-275, 2003.

U. Sauerland, Implicated presuppositions. The discourse potential of underspecified structures, pp.581-600, 2008.

U. Sauerland, J. Anderssen, and K. Yatsushiro, The plural is semantically unmarked, pp.409-430, 2005.

U. Sauerland, A. Tamura, M. Koizumi, and J. M. Tomlinson, Tracking down disjunction, Jsai international symposium on artificial intelligence, pp.109-121, 2015.

R. Scha, Distributive, collective and cumulative quantification, Formal methods in the study of language, vol.2, pp.483-512, 1981.

R. Scha, Distributive, collective and cumulative quantification. Truth, Interpretation, and Information, GRASS, vol.2, pp.131-158, 1984.

C. Scheepers, Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence of structural configuration in sentence production, Cognition, vol.89, issue.3, pp.179-205, 2003.

F. Schlotterbeck and O. Bott, Easy solutions for a hard problem? the computational complexity of reciprocals with quantificational antecedents, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, vol.22, issue.4, pp.363-390, 2013.

F. Schwarz, Maximality and definite plurals-experimental evidence, Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, vol.17, pp.509-526, 2013.

R. Schwarzschild, Springer Science &amp, vol.61, 1996.

R. Schwarzschild, Stubborn distributivity, multiparticipant nouns and the count/mass distinction, Proceedings of nels, vol.39, pp.661-678, 2011.

G. Scontras and N. D. Goodman, Resolving uncertainty in plural predication, Cognition, vol.168, pp.294-311, 2017.

A. Sennet, Ambiguity, The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring, 2016.

J. Song and K. Nakayama, Role of focal attention on latencies and trajectories of visually guided manual pointing, Journal of Vision, vol.6, issue.9, p.11, 2006.

J. H. Song and K. Nakayama, Hidden cognitive states revealed in choice reaching tasks, REFERENCES Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol.13, issue.8, pp.360-366, 2009.

B. Spector, Aspects of the pragmatics of plural morphology: On higher-order implicatures. Presuppositions and implicatures in compositional semantics, pp.243-281, 2007.

B. Spector, Scalar implicatures: Exhaustivity and gricean reasoning. Questions in dynamic semantics, vol.17, pp.225-249, 2007.

M. J. Spivey and R. Dale, Continuous dynamics in real-time cognition, Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol.15, issue.5, pp.207-211, 2006.

M. J. Spivey, M. Grosjean, and G. Knoblich, Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol.102, pp.10393-10398, 2005.

R. Stalnaker, Assertion. cole, p.(ed.) pragmatics (syntax & semantics 9, pp.315-332, 1978.

M. Steedman, Taking scope, 2012.

K. Syrett and J. Musolino, Collectivity, distributivity, and the interpretation of plural numerical expressions in child and adult language, Language Acquisition, vol.20, issue.4, pp.259-291, 2013.

A. Szabolcsi, . Springer, M. Thothathiri, and J. Snedeker, Syntactic priming during language comprehension in three-and four-year-old children, Ways of scope taking, vol.58, pp.188-213, 1997.

Y. Tian and R. Breheny, Negation and polarity: Experimental perspectives, pp.21-43, 2016.

Y. Tian, R. Breheny, and H. J. Ferguson, Why we simulate negated information: A dynamic pragmatic account, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol.63, issue.12, pp.2305-2312, 2010.

J. M. Tomlinson, T. M. Bailey, and L. Bott, Possibly all of that and then some: Scalar implicatures are understood in two steps, Journal of memory and language, vol.69, issue.1, pp.18-35, 2013.

E. Tulving and D. L. Schacter, Priming and human memory systems, Science, vol.247, issue.4940, pp.301-306, 1990.

S. L. Turnstall, The interpretation of quantifiers: semantics and processing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 1998.

M. Usher and J. L. Mcclelland, The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model, Psychological review, vol.108, issue.3, p.550, 2001.

C. Ussery, Processing plural dps: Collective, cumulative, and distributive interpretations, 1998.

R. Van-rooij and K. Schulz, Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences, Journal of logic, language and information, vol.13, issue.4, pp.491-519, 2004.

A. Vehtari, A. Gelman, and J. Gabry, Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Manuscript, 2016.

J. Viau, J. Lidz, and J. Musolino, Priming of abstract logical representations in 4-year-olds, Language Acquisition, vol.17, issue.1-2, pp.26-50, 2010.

H. D. Vries, Shifting sets, hidden atoms: the semantics of distributivity, plurality and animacy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 2015.

P. C. Wason, The contexts of plausible denial, Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, vol.4, issue.1, pp.7-11, 1965.

P. C. Wason and P. N. Johnson-laird, Psychology of reasoning: Structure and content, vol.86, 1972.

Y. Winter, Flexibility principles in boolean semantics, 2001.

Y. Winter and R. Scha, Plurals. Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, The, pp.77-113, 2015.

M. Wojnowicz, M. J. Ferguson, M. Spivey, M. T. Wojnowicz, M. J. Ferguson et al., The Self-Organization of Explicit Attitudes, vol.20, pp.1428-1435, 2009.
DOI : 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02448.x

K. Xiao and T. Yamauchi, Semantic priming revealed by mouse movement trajectories, Consciousness and cognition, vol.27, pp.42-52, 2014.
DOI : 10.1016/j.concog.2014.04.004

K. Xiao and T. Yamauchi, The role of attention in subliminal semantic processing: A mouse tracking study, PloS one, vol.12, issue.6, p.178740, 2017.

G. K. Zipf, Human behaviour and the principle of least-effort. cambridge ma edn, 1949.

E. Zweig, Number-neutral bare plurals and the multiplicity implicature, Linguistics and philosophy, vol.32, issue.4, pp.353-407, 2009.
DOI : 10.1007/s10988-009-9064-3
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00536330