Date: 16 May 2009
A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures
- Giorgio Magri
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Predicates such as tall or to know Latin, which intuitively denote permanent properties, are called individual-level predicates. Many peculiar properties of this class of predicates have been noted in the literature. One such property is that we cannot say #John is sometimes tall. Here is a way to account for this property: this sentence sounds odd because it triggers the scalar implicature that the alternative John is always tall is false, which cannot be, given that, if John is sometimes tall, then he always is. This intuition faces two challenges. First: this scalar implicature has a weird nature, since it must be surprisingly robust (otherwise, it could be cancelled and the sentence rescued) and furthermore blind to the common knowledge that tallness is a permanent property (since this piece of common knowledge makes the two alternatives equivalent). Second: it is not clear how this intuition could be extended to other, more complicated properties of individual-level predicates. The goal of this paper is to defend the idea of an implicature-based theory of individual-level predicates by facing these two challenges. In the first part of the paper, I try to make sense of the weird nature of these special mismatching implicatures within the recent grammatical framework for scalar implicatures of Chierchia (Structures and beyond, 2004) and Fox (2007). In the second part of the paper, I show how this implicature-based line of reasoning can be extended to more complicated properties of individual-level predicates, such as restrictions on the interpretation of their bare plural subjects, noted in Carlson (Reference to kinds in English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1977), Milsark (Linguistic Analysis 3.1: 1–29, 1977), and Fox (Natural Language Semantics 3: 283–341, 1995); restrictions on German word order, noted in Diesing (Indefinites, 1992); and restrictions on Q-adverbs, noted in Kratzer (The Generic Book, ed. Carlson and Pelletier, 125–175, 1995).
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at SALT16; at the Theory Group of Harvard University; at the LF Reading Group of MIT; and at the “MIT-France Workshop on Implicatures and Presuppositions.” I thank the audiences at these institutions for valuable comments. I wish to thank Gennaro Chierchia, Kai von Fintel, Danny Fox, and Irene Heim for detailed comments on various versions of this paper and significant suggestions. I also wish to thank Emmanuel Chemla, Ezra Keshet, Benjamin Spector, and Philippe Schlenker. Finally, I wish to thank Christine Bartels for her editorial help.
Bennett Michael., Barbara Partee. (1972) Toward the logic of tense and aspect in English. Distributed in 1978 by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington
Berman, Steve. 1990. Toward the semantics of open sentences: Wh-phrases and indefinites. In Proceedings of the seventh Amsterdam colloquium, ed. Martin Stokhof and Leen Torenvliet, 53–78. University of Amsterdam: ITLI.
Burton, S., and G. Jane. 1992. Coordination and VP-internal subjects. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 305–313.
Carlson, Gregory N. 1977. Reference to kinds in English. Doctoral diss., University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Published in 1980 by Garland Press, New York.
Chemla Emmanuel. (2006) A problem for the theory of anti-presuppositions. Manuscript, ENS Paris
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1995. Individual-level predicates as inherent generics. In The generic book, ed. G. N. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier, 125–175. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chierchia Gennaro. (1998) Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6: 339–405CrossRef
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In Structures and beyond, ed. A. Belletti. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chierchia Gennaro. (2006a) Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the ‘logicality’ of language. Linguistic Inquiry 37.4: 535–590CrossRef
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2006b. Obligatory Implicatures. Talk delivered at Sinn und Bedeutung 11, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona.
Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox, and Benjamin Spector. to appear. The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In Handbook of Semantics, ed. Paul Portner, Claudia Maienborn, and Klaus von Heusinger. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cohen Ariel., Nomi Erteschik-Shir. (2002) Topic, focus and the interpretation of bare plurals. Natural Language Semantics 10: 125–165CrossRef
Condoravdi, Cleo. 1992. Individual-level predicates in conditional clauses. Talk given at the LSA Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.
Diesing Molly. (1992) Indefinites. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Dowty, David R. (1979) Word meaning and Montague grammar. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht
Ferreira Marcelo. (2005) Event quantification and plurality. Doctoral diss., MIT
Fodor Janet Dean. (1970) The linguistic description of opaque contexts. Doctoral diss., MIT
Fox Danny. (1995) Economy and scope. Natural Language Semantics 3: 283–341CrossRef
Fox Danny. (2000) Economy and semantic interpretation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Fox, Danny. 2007. Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, ed. U. Sauerland and P. Stateva, 71–120. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fox Danny., Martin Hackl. (2006) The universal density of measurement. Linguistics and Philosophy 29.5: 537–586
Fox Danny., Jon Nissenbaum., Uli Sauerland. (2001) Association with focus. Manuscript, MIT
Gajewski Jon. (2003) On analyticity in natural language. Manuscript, MIT
Gajewski Jon. (2005) Neg-raising: Polarity and presupposition. Doctoral diss., MIT
Gazdar Gerald. (1979) Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition and logical form. Academic Press, New York
Geurts Bart. (2009) Scalar implicature and local pragmatics. Mind and Language 24: 51–79CrossRef
Glasbey, Sheila. 1997. I-level predicates that allow existential readings for Bare Plurals. In Proceedings of SALT7, ed. Aaron Lawson. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Grice, Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, ed. P. Cole and J. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic: Academic Press.
Gruber, J. 1965. Studies in lexical relations. Doctoral diss., MIT. Published in 1965 by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.
Hawkins John A. (1991) On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27: 405–442CrossRef
Heim, Irene. 1988. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral diss., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Heim, Irene. 1991. Artikel und Definitheit. In Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, ed. A. von Stechow and D. Wunderlich, 487–535. De Gruyter: Berlin.
Higginbotham, J., and G. Ramchand. 1997. The stage-level/individual-level distinction and the mapping hypothesis. In Oxford University working papers in linguistics, philosophy and phonetics, vol. 2, ed. David Willis, 55–83.
Horn, L. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Doctoral diss., UCLA. Distributed by IULC.
Horn, Laurence R. 2005. The border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. In Where semantics meets pragmatics, ed. K. Turner and K. von Heusinger. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Jäger Gerhard. (2001) Topic-comment structure and the contrast between stage level and individual level predicates. Journal of Semantics 18: 83–126CrossRef
Kamp, J. A. W. 1981. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Formal methods in the study of language, ed. J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, 277–321. Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre.
Kiss, K. E. 1998. On generic and existential bare plurals and the classification of predicates. In Events and Grammar, ed. S. Rothstein, 145–162. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Kratzer, Angelika. 1995. Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In The generic book, ed. G. N. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier, 125–175. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
(1995) The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items. Linguistic Analysis 25: 209–257
Landman, Fr (eds) (2000) Events and plurality. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London
Löbner Sebastian. (1985) Definites. Journal of Semantics 4: 279–326CrossRef
Magri, Giorgio. 2008. A theory of individual level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures (extended version). MIT manuscript; available at http://web.mit.edu/gmagri/www/ .
Maienborn Claudia. (2001) On the position and interpretation of locative modifiers. Natural Language Semantics 9: 191–240CrossRef
McNally, L. 1998. Stativity and telicity. In Events and grammar, ed. S. Rothstein, 293–307. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Milsark Gary L. (1977) Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential. Linguistic Analysis 3.1: 1–29
Musan Renate. (1995) On the temporal interpretation of noun phrases. Doctoral diss., MIT
Musan Renate. (1997) Tense, predicates, and lifetime effects. Natural Language Semantics 5: 271–301CrossRef
Percus, Orin. 2001. Pragmatic constraints on (Adverbial) (Temporal) quantification. In Papers in linguistics 22: Papers on predicative constructions, ed. G. Jaeger, A. Strigin, C. Wilder, and N. Zhang. Berlin: ZAS.
Percus, Orin. 2006. Antipresuppositions. In Theoretical and empirical studies of reference and anaphora: Toward the establishment of generative grammar as an empirical science, ed. A. Ueyama. Report of the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B), Project no. 15320052, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, 52–73.
Russell Benjamin. (2006) Against grammatical computation of scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics 23: 361–382CrossRef
Sauerland, Uli. 2003. Implicated presuppositions. In Proceedings of the conference Polarity, scalar phenomena, implicatures. University of Milano Bicocca, 18–20, June 2003.
Sauerland Uli. (2004) Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy 27: 367–391CrossRef
Schlenker, Philippe. 2006. Maximize presupposition and Gricean reasoning. Manuscript, UCLA and Institute Jean-Nicod.
Schubert, Lenhart K., and Francis Jeffry Pelletier. 1989. Generically speaking, or using discourse representation theory to interpret generics. In Properties, types and meaning, ed. Gennaro Chierchia, Barbara Partee, and Raymond Turner, 193–268. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Schwarzschild Roger. (1996) Pluralities. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht, Boston, London
Singh, Raj. 2009. Maximize presupposition! and informationally encapsulated implicatures. In Proceedings of SuB13, ed. A. Riester and T. Solstad. Stuttgart.
Spector Benjamin. (2006) Aspects de la Pragmatique des Operateurs Logiques. Université Paris 7, Doctoral diss
Spector Benjamin. (2006) Aspects of the pragmatics of plural morphology: On higher-order implicatures. Ecole Normale Supérieure, Manuscript
Spector, Benjamin. 2007. Scalar implicatures: Exhaustivity and Gricean reasoning. In Questions in dynamic semantics, ed. Maria Aloni, Alastair Butler, and Paul Dekker, 229–254. Elsevier.
von Fintel Kai. (1993) Exceptive constructions. Natural Language Semantics 1.2: 123–148
von Fintel Kai. (1997) Bare plurals, bare conditionals, and ‘only’. Journal of Semantics 14: 1–56CrossRef
van Rooij Robert., Katrin Schulz. (2004) Pragmatic meaning and non-monotonic reasoning: The case of exhaustive interpretation. Linguistics and Philosophy 29.5: 205–250
van Valin R.D. (1986) An empty category as the subject of a tensed S in English. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 581–586
- A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures
Natural Language Semantics
Volume 17, Issue 3 , pp 245-297
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Individual level predicates
- Bare plurals
- Scalar implicatures
- Giorgio Magri (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Bldg. 32-D808, Cambridge, MA, 02319, USA