The varying presuppositional nature of comparatives

Abstract

The presuppositional nature of different types of comparatives was studied by obtaining subjects' judgments concerning the “synonymity” of pairs of comparative statements and the “acceptability” of single comparative statements. The results indicated that, in general, significantly greater presupposition was involved in the negative comparatives (e.g.,Bob is not as large as Fred) than in the positive comparatives (e.g.,Fred is larger than Bob), in the extreme comparatives (e.g.,Fred is more saintly than Bob) than in the regular comparatives (e.g.,Fred is better than Bob), in the ordinal comparatives (e.g.,Bob is more agile than Fred) than in the ratio comparatives (e.g.,Bob is heavier than Fred), and in the marked comparatives (e.g.,Bob is worse than Fred) than in the unmarked comparatives (e.g.,Fred is better than Bob). The results also indicated that comparative statements containing marked adjectives from a ratio scale can be interpreted neutrally. The implications of these results for the linguistic distinction between marked and unmarked adjectives are discussed. Presuppositions were found to apply equally to the subject and object terms of a comparative statement. In general, the results suggest that presuppositional effects are quite systematic and accumulative in nature.