Reflections on the grammatical view of scalar implicatures

References

Bade, Nadine & Konstantin Sachs. 2019. EXH passes on alternatives: A comment on Fox and Spector (2018). Natural Language Semantics 27. 19–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-019-9149-7.Suche in Google Scholar

Bar-Lev, Moshe & Danny Fox. 2020. Free choice, simplification, and innocent inclusion. Natural Language Semantics 28. 175–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-020-09162-y.Suche in Google Scholar

Bassi, Itai, Guillermo Del Pinal & Uli Sauerland. 2021. Presuppositional exhaustification. Semantics and Pragmatics 14(11). 1–48 https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.14.11.Suche in Google Scholar

Chemla, Emmanuel & Benjamin Spector. 2011. Experimental evidence for embedded scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics 28. 359–400. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffq023.Suche in Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro. 2006. Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the “logicality” of language. Linguistic Inquiry 37. 535–590. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2006.37.4.535.Suche in Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro. 2013. Logic in grammar: Polarity, free choice, and intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697977.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox & Benjamin Spector. 2012. The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Portner Portner (eds.), An international handbook of natural language meaning, 2297–2332. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar

Ciardelli, Ivano & Floris Roelofsen. 2017. Hurford’s constraint, the semantics of disjunction, and the nature of alternatives. Natural Language Semantics 25. 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-017-9134-y.Suche in Google Scholar

Del Pinal, Guillermo. 2021. Oddness, modularity, and exhaustification. Natural Language Semantics 29. 115–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-020-09172-w.Suche in Google Scholar

Fox, Danny. 2007. Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In Uli Sauerland & Penka Stateva (eds.), Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, 71–120. Basingstoke: Palgrave.10.1057/9780230210752_4Suche in Google Scholar

Fox, Danny & Roni Katzir. 2011. On the characterization of alternatives. Natural Language Semantics 19. 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-010-9065-3.Suche in Google Scholar

Fox, Danny & Benjamin Spector. 2018. Economy and embedded exhaustification. Natural Language Semantics 26. 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-017-9139-6.Suche in Google Scholar

Gajewski, Jon & Yael Sharvit. 2012. In defense of the grammatical approach to local implicatures. Natural Language Semantics 20. 31–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-011-9074-x.Suche in Google Scholar

Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. New York: Academic Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Geurts, Bart. 2010. Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511975158Suche in Google Scholar

Geurts, Bart & Bob van Tiel. 2013. Embedded scalars. Semantics & Pragmatics 6(9). 1–37. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.6.9.Suche in Google Scholar

Geurts, Bart & Nausicaa Pouscoulous. 2009. Embedded implicatures? Semantics and Pragmatics 2(4). 1–34. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.2.4.Suche in Google Scholar

Grice, Paul. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Groenendijk, Jeroen & Martin Stokhof. 1984. On the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. In Fred, Landman & Frank Veltman (eds.), Varieties of Formal Semantics, 143–170. Dordrecht: Foris.Suche in Google Scholar

Horn, Larry. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Ph.D. UCLA.Suche in Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika & Junko Shimoyama. 2002. Indeterminate pronouns: The view from Japanese. In Yukio Otsu (ed.), The proceedings of the third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, 1–25. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Suche in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 2000. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Marty, Paul & Jacopo Romoli. 2021. Presupposed free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. Linguistics and Philosophy 45. 91–152.10.1007/s10988-020-09316-5Suche in Google Scholar

Recanati, Francois. 2010. Truth-conditional pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226993.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

van Rooij, Robert & Katrin Schulz. 2004. Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13. 491–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-004-2118-6.Suche in Google Scholar

Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1. 75–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02342617.Suche in Google Scholar

Russell, Benjamin. 2006. Against grammatical computation of scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics 23. 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffl008.Suche in Google Scholar

Sauerland, Uli. 2004. Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy 27. 367–391. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:ling.0000023378.71748.db.10.1023/B:LING.0000023378.71748.dbSuche in Google Scholar

Sauerland, Uli. 2012. The computation of scalar implicatures: Pragmatic, lexical or grammatical. Language and Linguistics Compass 6. 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.321.Suche in Google Scholar

Schulz, Katrin & Robert van Rooij. 2006. Pragmatic meaning and non-monotonic reasoning: The case of exhaustive interpretation. Linguistics and Philosophy 29. 205–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-3760-4.Suche in Google Scholar

Soames, Scott. 1982. How presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry 13. 483–545.Suche in Google Scholar

van Tiel, Bob. 2014. Embedded scalars and typicality. Journal of Semantics 31. 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/fft002.Suche in Google Scholar