Two hundred forty-one college Ss judged the validity of 48 syllogistic arguments. The arguments varied in terms of the connotative incompatibility of the words combined in the conclusions, and whether the conclusion was particular or universal. Both factors significantly influenced reasoning errors, but they did not interact. Results suggest that qualifiers affect cognitive interactions within assertions of a verbal hierarchy (having small but significant effects), while quantifiers affect interactions among different assertions (resulting in gross judgmental effects).