Abstract
Without actually employing the term ‘pragmatics’, Paul Grice laid out the map for modern pragmatic theory in his William James lectures of 1967 by setting out:
…a distinction…within the total signification of a remark…between what the speaker has said (in a certain favored and maybe in some degree artificial, sense of ‘said’), and what he has implicated (e.g., implied, indicated, suggested, etc.), taking into account the fact that what he has implicated may be either conventionally implicated (implicated by virtue of the meaning of some word or phrase which he has used) or non-conventionally implicated (in which case the specification of implicature falls outside the specification of the conventional meaning of the words used). (Grice 1989[1967]: 118)
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
A version of this paper appears as Horn (2009). Thanks are due to those who attended and commented on earlier presentations of parts of this material in Milan, East Lansing, Oakland, Rochester, Sheffield, and Leysin, and in particular to Barbara Abbott, Mira Ariel, Kent Bach, Emma Borg, David Braun, Bart Geurts, Michael Israel, Manfred Krifka, Anna Papafragou, Klaus Petrus, Jennifer Saul, and Gregory Ward. The blame is all mine.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anscombre, J. C. and Ducrot, O. (1983) L’argumentation dans la langue (Brussels: Pierre Mardaga).
Ariel, M. (2004) Most. Language, 80: 658–706.
Ariel, M. (2006) A ‘just that’ lexical meaning for most. In K. Turner and K. von Heusinger (eds.)Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics (London: Elsevier), pp. 49–91.
Austin, J. L. (1962) How To Do Things With Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Bach, K. (1994) Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language, 9: 124–62.
Bach, K. (1999) The myth of conventional implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22: 327–66.
Bach, K. (2001) You don’t say? Synthese, 127: 11–31.
Bach, K. (2005) Context ex machina. In Z. Szabó (ed.) Semantics vs. Pragmatics (Oxford: Clarendon), pp. 15–44.
Bach, K. (2006) The top 10 misconceptions about implicature. In B. Birner and G. Ward (eds.), Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean Studies in Pragmatics and Semantics in Honor of Laurence R. Horn (Amsterdam: Benjamins), pp. 21–30.
Bédier, J. (1946) Le roman de Tristan et Iseut, renouvelé par Joseph Bédier de l’Academie Française (Paris: L’Édition de l’Art H. Piazza).
Bontly, T. (2005) Modified Occam’s Razor: Parsimony arguments and pragmatic explanations. Mind & Language, 20: 288–312.
Borg, E. (2004) Minimal Semantics (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Bosanquet, B. (1911) Logic, Vol. 1, 2nd edn (Oxford: Clarendon).
Bott, L. and Noveck, I. (2004) Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 51: 437–57
Breheny, R., Katsos, N. and Williams, J. (2006) Are generalized scalar implicatures generated by default? An on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences. Cognition, 100: 434–63.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987) Politeness (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Bultinck, B. (2005) Numerous Meanings: The Meaning of English Cardinals and the Legacy of Paul Grice (Oxford: Elsevier).
Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E. (2005) Insensitive Semantics (Oxford: Blackwell).
Carston, R. (1988) Implicature, explicature, and truth-conditional semantics. In R. Kempson (ed.) Mental Representations: The Interface Between Language and Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 133–81.
Carston, R. (1995) Quantity maxims and generalized implicatures. Lingua, 96: 213–44.
Carston, R. (2002) Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication (Oxford: Blackwell).
Carston, R. (2004) Relevance theory and the saying-implicating distinction. In Horn and Ward (eds.), pp. 633–56.
Carston, R. (2005) Relevance theory, Grice, and the neo-Griceans: A response to Laurence Horn’s ‘Current issues in neo-Gricean pragmatics’. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2: 303–20.
Chapman, S. (2005) Paul Grice, Philosopher and Linguist. (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan).
Chierchia, G. (2004) Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/ pragmatics interface. In A. Belletti (ed.) Structures and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 39–103.
Chierchia, G., Crain, S. Guasti, M. T., Gualmini, A. and Meroni, L. (2001) The acquisition of disjunction: Evidence for a grammatical view of scalar implicatures. BUCLD 25 Proceedings (Somerville: Cascadilla), pp. 157–68.
Chomsky, N. (1972) Some empirical issues in the theory of transformational grammar. In S. Peters (ed.) Goals of Linguistic Theory (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall), pp. 63–130.
Cohen, L. J. (1971) Some remarks on Grice’s views about the logical particles of natural language. In Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.) Pragmatics of Natural Language (Dordrecht: Reidel), pp. 50–68.
Davies, B. (2007) Grice’s Cooperative Principle: Meaning and rationality. Journal of Pragmatics, 39: 2308–31.
De Morgan, A. (1858) On the syllogism: III, and on logic in general. In De Morgan On the syllogism and other logical writings (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul), pp. 74–146.
Fauconnier, G. (1975) Pragmatic scales and logical structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 6: 353–75.
Fauconnier, G. (1979) Comment contróler la vérité. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 25: 3–22.
Fox, D. (2006) Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. Ms., MIT.
Gazdar, G. (1979) Pragmatics (New York: Academic Press).
Geurts, B. (1998) Scalars. In P. Ludewig and B. Geurts (eds.) Lexikalische Semantik aus kognitiver Sicht (Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag), pp. 95–117.
Geurts, B. (2009) Scalar implicature and local pragmatics. Mind and Language, 24: 51–79.
Geurts, B. To appear. Quantity Implicatures (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Geurts, B. and Nouwen, R. (2007) At least et al.: The semantics of scalar modifiers. Language, 83: 533–59.
Giannakidou, A. (1998) Polarity Sensitivity as (Non -)Veridical Dependency (Amsterdam: John Benjamins).
Grice, H. P. (1961) The causal theory of perception. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 35: 121–52.
Grice, H. P. (1986) Reply to Richards. In R. Grandy and R. Warner (eds.) Philosophical Grounds of Rationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 45–106.
Grice, H. P. (1989) Studies in the Way of Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Gutzmann, D. (2007) Eine Implikatur konventioneller Art: Der Dativus Ethicus. Linguistische Berichte, 211: 277–308.
Gutzmann, D. (2008) On the Interaction between Modal Particles and Sentence Mood in German (Mainz: German Institute, Johannes Gutenberg University).
Hamilton, Sir W., of Edinburgh (1860) Lectures on Logic, Volume I. (Edinburgh: Blackwood).
Heim, I. (1984) A note on negative polarity and downward entailingness, NELS, 14: 98–107.
Hirschberg, J. (1985) A Theory of Scalar Implicature. University of Pennsylvania dissertation. (Revised version published New York: Garland, 1991.)
Horn, L. R. (1972) On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. UCLA dissertation. Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1976.
Horn, L. (1984) Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (ed.) Meaning, Form, and Use in Context (GURT ’84) (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), pp. 11–42.
Horn, L. (1989) A Natural History of Negation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). (Reissued with a new introduction, Stanford: CSLI, 2001.)
Horn, L. (1990) Hamburgers and truth: Why Gricean inference is Gricean. BLS, 16: 454–71.
Horn, L. (1992) The said and the unsaid. SALT II (Columbus: Ohio State University), pp. 163–92.
Horn, L. (2000a) From if to iff: Conditional perfection as pragmatic strengthening. Journal of Pragmatics, 32: 289–326.
Horn, L. (2000b) Pick a theory (not just any theory): Indiscriminatives and the free-choice indefinite. In L. Horn and Y. Kato (eds.) Negation and Polarity (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 147–92.
Horn, L. (2004) Implicature. In Horn and Ward (eds.), pp. 3–28.
Horn, L. (2006a) The border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. In K. Turner and K. von Heusinger (eds.) Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics (Oxford: Elsevier), pp. 21–48.
Horn, L. (2006b) More issues in neo- and post-Gricean pragmatics: a reply to Carston. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3: 81–93.
Horn, L. (2007a) Neo-Gricean pragmatics: a Manichaean manifesto. In N. Burton-Roberts (ed.) Pragmatics (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 158–83
Horn, L. (2007b) Toward a Fregean pragmatics: Voraussetzung, Nebengedanke, Andeutung. In I. Kecskes and L. Horn (eds.) Explorations in Pragmatics: Linguistic, Cognitive, and Intercultural Aspects (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter), pp. 39–69.
Horn, L. (2008) “I love me some him”: The landscape of non-argument datives. In O. Bonami and P. Cabredo Hofherr (eds.) Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, 7, pp. 169–92.
Horn, L. (2009) WJ-40: Implicature, truth, and meaning. International Review of Pragmatics, 1: 3–34.
Horn, L. (To appear) Histoire d’*O: Lexical pragmatics and the geometry of opposition. In J.-Y. Béziau (ed.) New Perspectives on the Square of Opposition (Bern: Peter Lang).
Horn, L. and Ward, G. (eds.) (2004) The Handbook of Pragmatics (Oxford: Blackwell).
Hurewitz, F., Papafragou, A., Gleitman, L. and Gelman, R. (2006) Asymmetries in the acquisition of numbers and quantifiers. Language Learning and Development, 2: 77–96.
Israel, M. (1996) Polarity sensitivity as lexical semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 19: 619–66.
Israel, M. (to appear) Pragmatics, Polarity, and the Logic of Scales (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Jaszczolt, K. (2005) Default Semantics: Foundations of a Compositional Theory of Acts of Communication (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Kadmon, N. and Landman, F. (1993) Any. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16: 353–422.
Kasher, A. (1982) Gricean inference revisited. Philosophica, 29: 25–44.
King, J. and Stanley, J. (2005) Semantics, pragmatics, and the role of semantic context. In Z. Szabó (ed.) Semantics vs. Pragmatics (Oxford: Clarendon), pp. 111–64.
Koenig, J.-P. (1991) Scalar predicates and negation: Punctual semantics and interval interpretations. CLS, 27: 140–55.
Korelitz, J. Hanff (2005) The White Rose (New York: Miramax Books).
Krifka, M. (1995) The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items. Linguistic Analysis, 25: 209–57.
Ladusaw, W. (1980) Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations (New York: Garland).
Lahiri, U. (1998) Focus and negative polarity in Hindi. Journal of Semantics, 6: 57–125.
Lee, Y.-S. and Horn, L. (1994) Any as indefinite + even. Ms., Yale University
Lehrer, A. (1974) Semantic Fields and Lexical Structure (Amsterdam: North-Holland).
Levinson, S. (1983) Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Levinson, S. (2000) Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Linebarger, M. (1987) Negative polarity and grammatical representation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 10: 325–87.
Macintyre, A. (1994) Truthfulness, lies, and moral philosophers: What can we learn from Mill and Kant? The Tanner Lectures. Downloadable at http://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/macintyre_1994.pdf.
Mill, J. S. (1867) An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy, 3rd edn (London: Longman).
Noveck, I. and Posada, A. (2003) Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study. Brain and Language, 85: 203–10.
Papafragou, A. and Musolino, J. (2003) Scalar implicatures: Experiments at the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognition, 86: 253–82.
Papafragou, A. and Schwarz, N. (2006) Most wanted. Language Acquisition, 13: 207–52.
Potts, C. (2005) The Logic of Conventional Implicatures (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Recanati, F. (2001) What is said. Synthese, 128: 75–91.
Recanati, F. (2004) Literal Meaning (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Reinhart, T. (2006) The acquisition of scalar implicatures. §5.3 of Interface Strategies — Optimal and Costly Computations (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Russell, B. 2006. Against grammatical computation of scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics, 23: 361–382.
Sauerland, U. (2004) Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27: 367–391.
Saul, J. (2002a) Speaker meaning, what is said and what is implicated. Noús, 36: 228–48.
Saul, J. (2002b) What is said and psychological reality: Grice’s project and relevance theorists’ criticisms. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25: 347–72.
Saul, J. (2006) Lying, misleading, and accidental falsehood: The role of what is said. Ms., University of Sheffield.
Schwenter, S. (1999) Pragmatics of Conditional Marking: Implicature, Scalarity, and Exclusivity (New York: Garland).
Simon, P. G. (1762) Extraits des Assertions dangereuses et pernicieuses en tous genres soutenues et enseignées par les soi-disans Jésuites. (Tome III: Parjure, Fausseté, Faux Témoignage.) Paris.
Soames, S. (1982) How presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 13: 483–535.
Solan, L. and Tiersma, P. (2004) Speaking of Crime: The Language of Criminal Justice (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Spector, B. (2006) Aspects de la pragmatique des opérateurs logiques. PhD dissertation, Université de Paris VII.
Strawson, P. F. (1952) Introduction to Logical Theory (London: Methuen).
Taylor, K. (2001) Sex, breakfast, and descriptus interruptus. Synthese, 128: 45–61.
Terkourafi, M. (2009) What use is ‘what is said’? In M. Kissine and P. de Brabanter (eds.) Utterance Interpretation and Cognitive Models (Amsterdam: Emerald), pp. 27–58.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Laurence R. Horn
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Horn, L.R. (2010). WJ-40: Issues in the Investigation of Implicature. In: Petrus, K. (eds) Meaning and Analysis. Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230282117_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230282117_15
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-36773-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-28211-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Language & Linguistics CollectionEducation (R0)