Oddness and Conjunction

  • Salvatore Pistoia-Reda
  • Jacopo Romoli
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition book series (PSPLC)

Abstract

In this chapter, the authors discuss the oddness effects arising from certain kinds of scalar sentences and review two main accounts to the oddness of these sentences: an account that explains oddness as an effect of a contextually contradictory scalar implicature and an alternative account that explains oddness based on the pragmatic usability of alternatives. They discuss the oddness behavior of conjunctive variants of the original cases which have been argued to be problematic for the account based on the mismatching scalar implicature. They argue that such variants are similarly problematic for the alternative account. They contribute a novel observation that the oddness of the conjunctive variants is not as stable as that of the original cases. Finally, they sketch a possible account of the oddness of these cases based on a relevance implication procedure from the entire conjunctive sentence to single conjuncts.

References

  1. Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox, and Benjamin Spector. 2012. Scalar Implicature as a Grammatical Phenomenon. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, ed. C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, and P. Portner, vol. 3, 2297–2331. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  2. Crnic, Luka. 2016. A Brief Remark on Formal Alternatives to, and Scalar Implicatures of, Sentences with Multiple Scalar Terms. MS Hebrew University.Google Scholar
  3. Fox, Danny. 2007. Free Choice and the Theory of Scalar Implicatures. In Presuppositions and Implicatures in Compositional Semantics. Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition, ed. Uli Sauerland and Penka Stateva. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Gotzner, Nicole, and Jacopo Romoli. 2016. The Scalar Inferences of Strong Scalar Terms Under Negative Quantifiers and Constraints on the Theory of Alternatives. MS ZAS/Ulster University.Google Scholar
  5. Hawkins, John. 1991. On (in)Definite Articles: Implicatures and (un)Grammaticality Prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27(2): 405–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heim, Irene. 1991. Artikel und definitheit. In Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der Zeitgenössischen Forschung, ed. Armin Von Stechow and Dieter Wunderlich, 487–535. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  7. Horn, Laurence. 1972. On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Ph.D. Thesis, UCLA.Google Scholar
  8. Katzir, Roni, and Raj Singh. 2013. Constraints on the Lexicalization of Logical Operators. Linguistics and Philosophy 36(1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Katzir, Roni, and Raj Singh. 2015. Economy of Structure and Information: Oddness, Questions, and Answers. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, ed. Eva Csipak and Hedde Zeijlstra, vol. 19, 302–319.Google Scholar
  10. Magri, Giorgio. 2009. A Theory of Individual-Level Predicates Based on Blind Mandatory Scalar Implicatures. Natural Language Semantics 17(3): 245–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Magri, Giorgio. 2011. Another Argument for Embedded Scalar Implicatures Based on Oddness in Downward Entailing Environments. Semantics and Pragmatics 4: 6–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Magri, Giorgio. 2016. Two Puzzles Raised by Oddness in Conjunction. Journal of Semantics 33(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
  13. Meyer, Marie-Christine. 2013. Ignorance and Grammar. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  14. Pistoia-Reda, Salvatore. 2014. Semantica e pragmatica linguistica. Tracce di normalità nelle implicature scalari. Biblioteca di testi e studi. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
  15. Pistoia-Reda, Salvatore. 2017. Contextual Blindness in Implicature Computation. Natural Language Semantics. doi:  10.1007/s11050-016-9131-6.Google Scholar
  16. Romoli, Jacopo. 2012. Obligatory Scalar Implicatures and Relevance. Snippets 25: 11–12.Google Scholar
  17. Rooth, Mats. 1992. A Theory of Focus Interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1(1): 75–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sauerland, Uli. 2004. Scalar Implicatures in Complex Sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(3): 367–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schlenker, Philippe. 2012. Maximize Presupposition and Gricean Reasoning. Natural Language Semantics 20(4): 391–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Spector, Benjamin. 2007. Aspects of the Pragmatics of Plural Morphology: On Higher-Order Implicatures. In Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics, 243–281. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Spector, Benjamin. 2014. Scalar Implicatures, Blindness and Common Knowledge: Comments on Magri (2011). In Pragmatics, Semantics and the Case of Scalar Implicatures. Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition, ed. Salvatore Pistoia-Reda, 146–169. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Stalnaker, Robert. 1978. Assertion. In Pragmatics, ed. Peter Cole, 315–332. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salvatore Pistoia-Reda
    • 1
  • Jacopo Romoli
    • 2
  1. 1.Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS)BerlinGermany
  2. 2.University of UlsterColeraineUK

Personalised recommendations