Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Intermediate Scalar Implicatures

  • Chapter
Pragmatics, Semantics and the Case of Scalar Implicatures

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition ((PSPLC))

Abstract

In this chapter, I am concerned with the explanation of scalar implicatures; specifically, with the question whether scalar implicatures should be explained in the pragmatics or in the semantics of a sentence.* In this discussion, I use the terms implicative and scalar implicative simply as labels for a certain range of facts. Grice (1967, 1975, 1989) introduced the term implkature for a variety of cancellable inferences and simultaneously suggested an explanation of implicatures on the basis of his maxims — a pragmatic explanation. Horn (1972) extended this type of account to scalar implicatures. However, many in the field (e.g., Levin-son 2000; Chierchia 2004) have already used Grice’s and Horn’s terms as descriptive labels for a range of phenomena, without committing to a specific explanation, as I will in the following.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Beck, Sigrid. 2012. Comparison constructions. In Claudia Maienborned, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner (eds), Handbook of Semantics. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breheny, Richard. 2008. A new look at the semantics and pragmatics of numerically quantified noun phrases. Journal of Semantics 25:93–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, Greg, and Francis Jeffry Pelletier. 2002. The average American has 2.3 children, journal of Semantics 19:73–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, Robyn. 1988. Implicarurc, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R.M. Kempson (ed.), Mental Representations: the Interface between Language and Reality, 155–181. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, Emmanuel. 2009. Universal implicatures and free choice effects: experimental data. Semantics and Pragmatics 2:1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, Emmanuel, and Benjamin Spector. 2011. Experimental evidence for embedded scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics 28:359–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond, 39–103. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro. 2006. Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the “logicality” of language. Linguistic Inquiry 37:535–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro. 2013. Logic in Grammar: Polarity, Free Choice, and Intervention. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox, and Benjamin Spector. 2009. Hurford’s constraint and the theory of scalar implicatures: evidence for embedded implicatures. Semanticsarchive.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox, and Benjamin Spector. 2012. Scalar implicature as a grammatical phenomenon. In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn, and Paul Portner (eds), Handbook of Semantics, volume 3, 2297–2331. Mouton de G ruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Ariel, and Manfred Krifka. 2011. Superlative quantifiers as meta speech acts. In Barbara Partee, Michael Glanzberg, and Jurgis Skilters (eds), The Baltic Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication, 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Jonathan. 1971. Some remarks on Grice’s views about the logical particles of natural language. In Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.), Pragmatics of Natural Languages, 50–68. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, Chris, and Napoleon Katsos. 2010. Comparative and superlative quantifiers: pragmatic effects of comparison type, journal of Semantics 27(3): 271–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Danny. 2007. Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In Uli Sauerland and Penka Staleva (eds), Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics, 71–120. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Danny, and Roni Katzir. 2011. On the characterization of alternatives. Natural language semantics 19:87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gajewski, Jon, and Yael Sharvit. 2012. In defense of the grammatical approach to local implicatures. Natural Language Semantics 20:31–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and logical Form. New York, N.Y.: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, Bart. 2009. Scalar implicature and local pragmatics. Mind and Language 24:51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, Bart, and Nausicaa Pouscoulous. 2009. Embedded implicatures?!? Semantics and Pragmatics 2:1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, Paul. 1967. Logic and conversation. Unpublished lecture notes from William James Lectures at Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Jennifer L. Morgan (eds), Speech Acts, number 3 in Syntax and Semantics, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, Paul. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gualmini, Andrea, Sarah Ilusley, Valentine Ilacquard, and Danny Fox. 2008. The question-answer required for scope assignment. Natural Language Semantics, 16:205–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackl, Martin. 2000. Comparative Quantifiers. Doctoral Dissertation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, Laurence R. 1972. On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Doctoral Dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, Laurence R. 1989. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurford, James R. 1974. Inclusive or exclusive disjunction. Foundations of Language 11:409–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzir, Roni. 2007. Structurally-defined alternatives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30:669–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Christopher. 1997. Projecting the adjective: the syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. Doctoral Dissertation. Santa Cruz: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Christopher. 2013a. A scalar semantics for scalar readings of number words. In Ivano Caponigro and Carlo Cecchetto (eds), From Grammar to Meaning: The Spontaneous Logicality of Language, 172–200. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Christopher. 2013b. A “de-Fregean” semantics for modified and unmodified numerals. Unpublished Ms., University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Christopher and Jason Stanley. 2009. On ‘average’. Mind 118:583–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, Clemens, and Benjamin Spector. 2009. Not too strong! generalizing the scope economy condition. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 14, 305–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNabb, Yaron, and Doris Pcnka. 2013. The interpretation of superlative modifiers and deontic modals: an experimental investigation. Presentation at Sinn und Bedeutung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Marie-Christine. 2013. Ignorance and grammar. Doctoral Dissertation., Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Marie-Christine, and Uli Sauerland. 2009. A pragmatic constraint on ambiguity detection: a rejoinder to Büring and Hartmann and to Reis. Natural Language fk Linguistic Theory 27:139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musolino, Julien. 2004. The semantics and acquisition of number words: integrating linguistic and developmental perspectives. Cognition 93:1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nouwen, Rick. 2010. Two kinds of modified numerals. Semantics and Pragmatics 3:1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Ben. 2006. Against grammatical computation of scalar implicatures. journal of Semantics 23:361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, Uli. 2004a. On embedded implicatures. Journal of Cognitive Science 5:103–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, Uli. 2004b. Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy 27–367-391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, Uli. 2010. Embedded implicatures and experimental constraints: a reply to Geurts & Pouscoulous and Chemla. Semantics & Pragmatics 3:2:1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, Uli. 2012. The computation of scalar implicatures: pragmatic, lexical, or grammatical? Language and Linguistics Compass 6:36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharten, Rosemarijn. 1997. Exhaustive interpretation: a discourse-semantic account. Doctoral Dissertation. Nijmegen, Netherlands: Radboud University Nijmegen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, Raj. 2006. Eager for distinctness. Proceedings of the Eleventh ESSLLI Student Session, Janneke Huitink & Sophia Katrenko (editors).

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, Benjamin. 2013a. Bare numerals and scalar implicatures. Language and Linguistics Compass 7:273–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, Benjamin. 2013b. Global positive polarity items and obligatory exhaus-lificalioii. Semanlicsarchive.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, Benjamin. 2013c. Homogeneity and plurals: from the stronger meaning hypothesis to supervaluations. Sinn und Bedeutung 18, Abstract Booklet.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for General Linguistics (ZAS), Berlin, Germany

    Uli Sauerland (leader of the Pragmatics Research Team)

Authors
  1. Uli Sauerland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze Sociali Politiche e Cognitive, Università di Siena 1240, Italy

    Salvatore Pistoia Reda (DAAD Visiting fellow) (DAAD Visiting fellow)

  2. Zentrum für Allegmeine Sprachwissenschaft, Germany

    Salvatore Pistoia Reda (DAAD Visiting fellow) (DAAD Visiting fellow)

Copyright information

© 2014 Uli Sauerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sauerland, U. (2014). Intermediate Scalar Implicatures. In: Reda, S.P. (eds) Pragmatics, Semantics and the Case of Scalar Implicatures. Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333285_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation