Against grammatical computation of scalar implicatures

Journal of Semantics

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 361-382

  Russell, Benjamin ^a  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845635278     PISSN: 01675133     EISSN: 14774593     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jos/ffl008     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Blutner, R. (2004) 'Pragmatics and the lexicon'. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds), Handbook of Pragmatics. Blackwell.
2. Carston, R. (1988) 'Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics'. In R. Kempson (ed.), Mental Representations: The Interface Between Language and Reality. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England, 155-181.
3. Chierchia, G. (1984) Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts.
4. Chierchia, G. (2004) 'Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface'. In A. Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond. Oxford University Press.
5. Cresswell, M. J. (1976) 'The semantics of degree'. In B. H. Partee (ed.), Montague Grammar. Academic Press. New York, 261-292.
6. Fauconnier, G. (1975) 'Pragmatic scales and logical structure'. Linguistic Inquiry 6(3):353-375.
7. Fox, D. & Hackl, M. (to appear) 'The universal density of measurement'. Linguistics and Philosophy.
8. Gazdar, G. (1979) Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form. Academic Press. New York.
9. Giannakidou, A. (1998) Polarity Sensitivity as (Non) Veridical Dependency. John Benjamins. Amsterdam.
10. Grice, H. P. (1975) 'Logic and conversation'. In D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds), The Logic of Grammar. Dickenson Publishing Co. Encino, California, 64-75.
11. Grodner, D. & Sedivy, J. (to appear) 'The effect of speaker-specific information on pragmatic inferences'. In N. Pearlmutter and E. Gibson (eds), The Processing and Acquisition of Reference. MIT Press. Cambridge.
12. Hirschberg, J. (1991) A Theory of Scalar Implicature Garland Publishing Company. New York.
13. Horn, L. (1992) 'The said and the unsaid'. Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory II, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, pp. 163-192. Available from CLC Publications, Department of Linguistics, Morrill Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-4701.
14. Horn, L. R. (1972), On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
15. Horn, L. R. (1978) 'Lexical incorporation, implicature, and the least effort hypothesis'. In D. Farkas (ed.), Papers from the Parasession on the Lexicon. Chicago Linguistics Society. Chicago, 196-209.
16. Horn, L. R. (1989) A Natural History of Negation. Chicago University Press. Chicago, IL.
17. Kadmon, N. and Landman, F. (1993) 'Any'. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(4):353-422.
18. King, J. C. and Stanley, J. (2006) 'Semantics, pragmatics, and the role of semantic content'. In Z. Szabo (ed.), Semantics vs. Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
19. Krifka, M. (1995) 'Focus and the interpretation of generic sentences'. In G. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier (eds), The Generic Book. Chicago University Press. Chicago, IL, 238-264.
20. Ladusaw, W. A. (1979) Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations. PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin.
21. Lahiri, U. (1997) 'Focus and negative polarity in Hindi'. Natural Language Semantics 6(1):57-123.
22. Landman, F. (2001) Events and Plurality: The Jerusalem Lectures, Vol. 76 of Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
23. Lee, Y.-S. and Horn, L. (1994) Any as indefinite plus even. Manuscript, Yale University.
24. Levinson, S. C. (2001) Presumptive Meanings. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
25. Linebarger, M. C. (1987) 'Negative polarity and grammatical representation'. Linguistics and Philosophy 10(3):325-387.
26. Matsumoto, Y. (1995) 'The conversational condition on Horn scales'. Linguistics and Philosophy 18(1):21-60.
27. McCawley, J. D. (1978) 'Conversational implicature and the lexicon'. In P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics. Academic Press. New York, 245-258.
28. Recanati, F. (2003) 'Embedded implicatures' Philosophical Perspectives 17(1):299-332.
29. Sauerland, U. (2004) 'Scalar implicatures in complex sentences'. Linguistics and Philosophy 27:367-391.
30. Schwarzschild, R. and Wilkinson, K. (2001) 'Quantifiers in comparatives: A semantics of degree based on intervals'. Natural Language Semantics 10(1):1-41.
31. Sedivy, J. (2003) 'Pragmatic versus form-based accounts of referential contrast: Evidence for effects of informativity expectations'. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32(1):3-23.
32. Soames, S. (1982) 'How presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem'. Linguistic Inquiry 13:483-545.
33. van Rooij, R. and Schulz, K. (2004) 'Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences'. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13:491-519.
34. von Fintel, K. (1999) 'NPI licensing, Strawson entailment, and context dependency'. Journal of Semantics 16(2):97-148.
35. Zwarts, F. (1996) 'Three types of polarity'. In F. Hamm and E. Hinrichs (eds), Plurality and Quantification. Kluwer. Dordrecht, 177-238.