Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Direct and Indirect Scalar Implicatures Share the Same Processing Signature

  • Chapter
Pragmatics, Semantics and the Case of Scalar Implicatures

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

Abstract

Scalar implicatures (henceforth Sis) are inferences which arise when a speaker utters a sentence like (1):

  1. (1)

    Some of the students came to the party.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
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

  • Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C, and Tily, H.J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3):255–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bott, L. and Noveck, I. (2004). Some utterances are underinformative: the onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 53:437–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bott, L., Bailey, T. M., and Grodner, D. (2012). Distinguishing speed fromaccuracy in scalar implicatures. Journal of Memory and Language, 66(1):123–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, P. A. and Just, M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: a psycholin-guistic processing model of vérification. Psychological Review, 82(1):45–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E. (2009). Similarity: towards a unified account of scalar implicatures, free choice permission, and presupposition projection. Under Revision for Semantics and Pragmatics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E. and Bott, L. (2011). Processing presuppositions dynamic semantics vs pragmatic enrichment. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(3): 241–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E. and Bott, L. (2012). Processing: free choice at no cost. In Logic, Language and Meaning, 143–149. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E., Homer, V., and Rothschild, D. (2011). Modularity and intuitions in formal semantics: the case of polarity items. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34(6):537–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E. and Singh, R. (2013). Remarks on the experimental turn in the study of scalar implicature. Under Revision for Language and Linguistic Compass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemla, E. and Spector, B. (2011). Experimental evidence for embedded scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics, 28:359–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H. and Chase, W. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3):472–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Neys, W. and Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load. Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie), 54(2):128–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degen, J. and Tanenhaus, M. K. (2011). Making inferences: the case of scalar implicature processing. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 3299–3304.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGutis, J., Wilmer, J., Mercado, R. J., and Cohan, S. (2012). Using regression to measure holistic face processing reveals a strong link with face recognition ability. Cognition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, D. (2007). Free choice disjunction and the theory of scalar implicature. In Sauerland, U. and Stateva, P. (eds), Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics, 71–120. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. (1967). Logic and conversation. William James Lectures, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Y. T. and Snedeker, J. (2009a). Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: insight into the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognitive Pyschology, 58:376–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Y T. and Snedeker, J. (2009b). Semantic and pragmatic interpretation in 5-year olds: evidence from real-time spoken language comprehension. Developmental Psychology, 45:1723–1739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: away from anovas (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4):434–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katzir, R. (2007). Structurally defined alternatives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30:669–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., and Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7): 1033–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaup, B., Yaxley, R. H., Madden, C. J., Zwaan, R. A., and Lüdtke, J. (2007). Experiential simulations of negated text information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(7):976–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, A. and Shimoyama, J. (2002). Indeterminate pronouns: the view from Japanese. In 3rd Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magri, G. (2009). A theory of individual level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures. Natural Language Semantics, 17:245–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marty, P. and Chemla, E. (2013). Scalar implicatures: working memory and a comparison with ‘only’. Frontiers in Psychology, 4:403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noveck, I. A. and Posada, A. (2003). Characterizing the time course of an implicature: an evoked potentials study. Brain and Language, 85(2):203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronioli, J. (2013). The presuppositions of soft triggers are obligatory scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronioli, J. and Schwarz, F. (2013). An experimental comparison between presuppositions and indirect scalar implicatures. In Sinn und Bedeutung, volume 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauerland, U. (2004). Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27:367–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, B. (2003). Scalar implicatures: exhaustivity and Gricean reasoning. In ten Cate, B. (ed.), Proceedings of the Eigth ESSLLI Student Session, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, B. (2005). Scalar implicatures: exhaustivity and Gricean reasoning. In Aloni, M., Butler, A., and Dekker, P. (eds), Questions in Dynamic Semantics. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Rooij, R. and Schulz, K. (2004). Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 13:491–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tiel, B., van Miltenburg, E., Zevakhina, N., and Geurts, B. (2013). Scalar diversity. Unpublished MS.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ENS, Paris, France

    Alexandre Cremers PhD

  2. Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives, ENS (École Normale Supérieure), Paris, France

    Emmanuel Chemla (research scientist)

Authors
  1. Alexandre Cremers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emmanuel Chemla
    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 Alexandre Greniers and Emmanuel Chemla

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cremers, A., Chemla, E. (2014). Direct and Indirect Scalar Implicatures Share the Same Processing Signature. 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_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation