Scalar Implicatures, Polarity Phenomena, and the Syntax/Pragmatics Interface

Structures and beyond: the Cartography of Syntactic Structures: Volume 3

Volumn 3, Issue , 2023, Pages 39-103

  Chierchia, Gennaro ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

altogether; concerning; factual; grammatical; understood

Indexed keywords

EID: 85191938183     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780195171976.003.0003     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. Atlas, J., & S. Levinson. (1981). “It-Clefts, Informativeness, and Logical Form: Radical Pragmatics.” In P. Cole, ed., Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
2. Chierchia, G. (1995). “Individual Level Predicates as Inherent Generics.” In G. Carlson and J. Pelletier, eds., The Generic Book. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Chomsky, N. (1999). Derivation by Phase. MITWPL 18.
4. Dayal, V. (1998). “Any as Inherent Modal.” Linguistics and Philosophy, 21: 433-476.
5. Diesing, M. (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
6. Dowty, D. (1979). Word Meaning in Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
7. Fauconnier, G. (1975). “Pragmatic Scales and Logical Structure.” Linguistic Inquiry 6.
8. Fintel, K. von. (1999). “NPI-Licensing, Strawson-Entailment, and Context Dependency.” Journal of Semantics 16, 97-148.
9. Gazdar, G. (1979). Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form. New York: Academic Press.
10. Giannakidou, A. (1997). The Landscape of Polarity Items. Ph.D. diss., University of Groeningen, Germany.
11. Grice, P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
12. Gualmini, A., S. Crain, L. Meroni, G. Chierchia, M. T. Guasti. (2001). The Semantics-Pragmatics Interface in Child Language. Paper presented at Salt XI, New York University, New York.
13. Haspelmath, M. (1997). Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Heim, I. (1984). “A Note on Polarity Sensitivity and Downward Entailingness.” NELS 14.
15. Higginbotham, J. (1991). “Either/Or.” Proceedings of NELS 21.
16. Hirschberg, J. (1985). A Theory of Scalar Implicature. Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
17. Horn, L. (1972). On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Ph.D. diss., UCLA; distributed by IULC.
18. Horn, L. (1989). A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Israel, M. (1998). The Rhetoric of Grammar: Scalar Reasoning and Polarity Sensitivity. Ph.D. diss., University of California, San Diego.
20. Jong, F. de, and H. Verkuyl. (1985). “Generalized Quantifiers: The Properness of their Strength.” In J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen, eds., Generalized Quantifiers in Natural Language. Dordrecht: Foris.
21. Kadmon, N., & F. Landman. (1993). “Any.” Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 353-422.
22. Kempson, R. (1975). Presuppositions and the Delimitation of Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Krifka, M. (1995). “The Semantics and Pragmatics of Polarity Items.” Linguistic Analysis 25, 209-257.
24. Krifka, M., et al. (1995). “Genericity: An Introduction.” In G. Carlson & J. Pelletier, eds., The Generic Book. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Ladusaw, W. (1979). Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relation. Ph.D. diss., University of Texas, Austin; distributed by IULC.
26. Lahiri, U. (1998). “Focus and Negative Polarity in Hindi.” Natural Language Semantics 6, 57-125.
27. Landman, F. (1998). “Plurals and Maximalization.” In S. Rothstein, ed., Events and Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
28. Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
29. Linebarger, M. (1981). The Grammar of Negative Polarity. Ph.D. diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
30. Noveck, I. (2001). “When Children Are More Logical Than Adults: Investigations of Scalar Implicature.” Cognition 78/2, 165-188.
31. Noveck, I., G. Chierchia, F. Chevaux, R. Guelmiuger, E. Sylvestre. (2001). “Linguistic-Pragmatic Factors in Interpreting Disjunctions, " ms., Centre for Cognitive Science, Lyon.
32. Partee, B. H. (1987). “Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-shifting Principles.” In J. Groenendijk, M. Stokhov, F. Veltman. eds., Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers. Dordrecht: Foris.
33. Partee, B. H., & M. Rooth. (1983). “Generalized Conjunction and Type Ambiguity.” In R. Bauerle, C. Schwarze, & A. von Stechow, eds., Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language. Berlin: de Gruyter.
34. Percus, O. (2000). “Constraints on Some Other Variables in Syntax.” Natural Language Semantics 8, 175-229.
35. Reinhart, T. (1999). “The Processing Cost of Reference-Set Computation: Guess Patterns in Acquisition.” OTS Working Papers, Utrecht.
36. Rizzi, L. (2001). “Relativized Minimality Effects.” In M. Baltin & C. Collins, ed., Handbook of Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
37. Rooth, M. (1985). Association with Focus. Ph.D. diss., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
38. Sauerland, U. (1999). Paper presented at the meeting at the Centre for Cognitive Science, Lyon.
39. Stalnaker, R. (1978). “Assertion.” In P. Cole, ed., Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
40. Szabolcsi, A., & F. Zwarts. (1992). “Weak Islands and an Algebraic Semantics for Scope Taking.” Natural Language Semantics 1, 235-284.
41. Westertahl, D. (1988). “Quantifiers in Formal and natural Languages.” In D. Gabbay & F. Guenthner, eds., Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. 4. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
42. Zwarts, F. (1996). “Three Types of Polarity.” In F. Hamm & E. Hinrichs, eds., Plural Quantification. Dordrecht: Kluwer.