Shared and distinct mechanisms in deriving linguistic enrichment

- Linguistic enrichment typically thought of as pragmatic or semantic can be primed.
- There are mechanisms that are shared across different enrichment categories.
- Some phenomena (e.g., plurals) are not primed by classic enrichments.
- Our data challenge theories of individual enrichment category theories.

Meanings of basic expressions can be enriched by considering what the speaker could have said, but chose not to, that is, the alternatives. We report three priming experiments that test whether there are shared enrichment mechanisms across a diverse range of linguistic categories. We find that quantifier, number, and ad hoc enrichments exhibit robust priming within their categories and between each other. Plural enrichments, in contrast, demonstrate within-category priming but no between-category priming. Our results demonstrate that (1) enrichment typically thought of as pragmatic or semantic can be primed in the same way as syntactic structures and (2) there are mechanisms that are shared across different enrichment categories, and that some phenomena (e.g., plurals) are excluded from this class. We discuss the implications of our findings for psychological models of enrichment, theories of individual categories of enrichment, and structural priming.