Abstract

A disjunctive sentence like Olivia took Logic or Algebra conveys that Olivia didn’t take both classes (exclusivity) and that the speaker doesn’t know which of the two classes she took (ignorance). The corresponding sentence with a possibility modal, Olivia can take Logic or Algebra, conveys instead that she can take Logic and that she can take Algebra (free choice). These exclusivity, ignorance and free choice inferences are argued by many to be scalar implicatures. Recent work has looked at cases in which exclusivity and ignorance appear to be computed instead at the presupposition level, independently from the assertion. On the basis of those data, Spector and Sudo (Linguist Philos 40(5):473–517, 2017) have argued for a hybrid account relying on a pragmatic principle for deriving implicatures in the presupposition. In this paper, we observe that a sentence like Noah is unaware that Olivia can take Logic or Algebra has a reading on which free choice appears in the presupposition, but not in the assertion, and we show that deriving this reading is challenging on Spector and Sudo’s (2017) hybrid account. Following the dialectic in Fox (Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, Palgrave, London, pp 71–120, 2007), we argue against a pragmatic approach to presupposition-based implicatures on the ground that it is not able to account for presupposed free choice. In addition, we raise a novel challenge for Spector and Sudo’s (2017) account coming from the conflicting presupposed ignorance triggered by sentences like #Noah is unaware that I have a son or a daughter, which is infelicitous even if it’s not common knowledge whether the speaker has a son or a daughter. More generally, our data reveals a systematic parallelism between the assertion and presupposition levels in terms of exclusivity, ignorance, and free choice. We argue that such parallels call for a unified analysis and we sketch how a grammatical theory of implicatures where meaning strengthening operates in a similar way at both levels (Gajewski and Sharvit in Nat Lang Semant 20(1):31–57, 2012; Magri in A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures, MIT dissertation, 2009; Marty in Implicatures in the DP domain, MIT dissertation, 2017) can account for such parallels.

Highlights

  • A disjunctive sentence like (1) has long been observed to give rise to two types of inferences: the exclusivity inference in (1-a), conveying that the speaker doesn’t believe that both disjuncts are true, and the ignorance inference in (1-b), conveying that the speaker is ignorant about which disjunct is true.(1) Olivia took Logic or Algebra.a

  • Romoli reveals a systematic parallelism between the assertion and presupposition levels in terms of exclusivity, ignorance, and free choice. We argue that such parallels call for a unified analysis and we sketch how a grammatical theory of implicatures where meaning strengthening operates in a similar way at both levels (Gajewski and Sharvit in Nat Lang Semant 20(1):31–57, 2012; Magri in A theory of individuallevel predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures, MIT dissertation, 2009; Marty in Implicatures in the DP domain, MIT dissertation, 2017) can account for such parallels

  • We add to this definition the corresponding one for innocently includable presuppositional alternatives in (61-b): the IIprs-alternatives to a sentence φp are those presuppositional alternatives to φp whose presupposition can be added to φp’s presupposition without conflicting with any of the potential presupposed implicatures arising from φp on the basis of the IEprs-alternatives

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A disjunctive sentence like (1) has long been observed to give rise to two types of inferences: the exclusivity inference in (1-a), conveying that the speaker doesn’t believe that both disjuncts are true, and the ignorance inference in (1-b), conveying that the speaker is ignorant about which disjunct is true. The exclusivity, ignorance and free choice inferences above have all been argued to be scalar implicatures.. Our dialectic will closely follows that of Fox (2007): we will argue against a pragmatic approach to presupposition-based implicatures on the ground that it is not able to account for presupposed free choice. We observe that these novel data reveal a systematic parallelism between the assertion and presupposition levels in terms of exclusivity (9), free choice (10), and ignorance inferences (11). We argue that a grammatical theory of implicatures where meaning strengthening operates in a similar way at the assertion and presupposition levels (Gajewski and Sharvit 2012; Magri 2009; Marty 2017) can account for this parallelism and provide a unified analysis of those inferences.

Two main approaches to scalar implicatures
The challenge of free choice
The grammatical approach to free choice
The phenomenon
A unified grammatical approach and its problems
A hybrid account
Presupposed free choice
Presupposed speaker-oriented ignorance
Taking stock
Presupposed implicatures in the grammar
Presupposed ignorance in the grammar
Mandatory implicatures and contextual mismatches
Factive presuppositions and the asymmetry
Other directions
Logical integrity
Non-implicature approaches to free choice and ignorance
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call