Scalar Implicature
Children younger than 5½ years of age do not draw inferences based on the quantity of information expressed (e.g. the inference that ‘some of the animals are sleeping’ implies ‘not all the animals are sleeping’) at the rates that adults do. Explanations of this difficulty include limited processing resources, shallow lexical entries and lack of adult-like expectations of informativeness. I review experimental evidence and theoretical accounts of the development of the ability to draw these inferences with the aim (a) to highlight links between potentially related phenomena (such as these inferences and word learning), and (b) to outline a novel account which makes predictions about the underlying mechanisms and age of acquisition of these inferences.
References (48)
Baldwin, D.A. (1993). Infants’ ability to consult the speaker for clues to word reference.
Journal of Child Language
, 20, 395–418.
Bagassi, M., D’Addario, M., Macchi, L., & Sala, V. (2009). Children’s acceptance of underinformative sentences: The case of some as a determiner.
Thinking & Reasoning
, 15(2), 211–235.
Barner, D., & Bachrach, A. (2010). Inference and exact numerical representation in early language development.
Cognitive Psychology
, 60, 40–62.
Barner, D., Brooks, N., & Bale, A. (2011). Accessing the unsaid: The role of scalar alternatives in children’s pragmatic inference.
Cognition
, 118, 87–96.
Barner, D., Chow, K., & Yang, S.-J. (2009). Finding one’s meaning: A test of the relation between quantifiers and integers in language development.
Cognitive Psychology
, 58, 195–219.
Bloom, P. (2000).
How Children Learn the Meanings of Words
. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Bott, L. & Noveck, I.A. (2004). Some utterances are underinformative: the onset and time course of scalar inferences.
Journal of Memory and Language
, 51, 437–457.
Clark, E.V. (1987). The principle of contrast: A constraint on language acquisition. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.),
Mechanisms of Language Acquisition
(pp. 1–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clark, E.V. (1988). On the logic of contrast.
Journal of Child Language
, 15, 317–335.
Clark, E.V. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast.
Journal of Child Language
, 17, 417–431.
Clark, E.V. (2003).
First Language Acquisition
. Cambridge: CUP.
Chierchia, G. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In A. Belletti (Ed.),
Structures and Beyond
(pp. 39–103). Oxford: OUP.
Chierchia, G., Fox, D. & Spector, B. (in press). The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn & P. Portner (Eds.),
Handbook of Semantics
. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Davies, C., & Katsos, N. (2010). Over-informative children: Production/comprehension asymmetry or tolerant of pragmatic violations?
Lingua
, 120(8), 1956–72.
De Neys, W., & Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load: Dual task impact on scalar implicature.
Experimental Psychology
, 54, 128–133.
Feeney, A., Scrafton, S., Duckworth, A. & Handley, S.J. (2004). The story of some: Everyday pragmatic inference by children and adults.
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology
58(2): 121–132.
Geurts, B. (2010).
Quantity Implicature
. Cambridge: CUP.
Grassmann, S., Stracke, M., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Two-year-olds exclude novel objects as potential referents of novel words based on pragmatics.
Cognition, 112
, 488–493.
Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.),
Syntax and Semantics
, Vol. 3. (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press. Reprinted in Grice, H.P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Grosse, G., Schulze, C., Noveck,, I., A., Tomasello, M., & Katsos, N. (in preparation). Early success with inferential communication.
Guasti, M.T., Chierchia, G., Crain, S., Foppolo F., Gualmini, A., & Meroni, L. (2005). Why children and adults sometimes (but not always) compute implicatures.
Language and Cognitive Processes
, 20(5), 667–696.
Horn, L. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.),
Meaning, Form and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications, Proceedings of GURT ‘84
(pp. 11–42). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Horn, L. (1992). The said and the unsaid.
SALT II: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory
(pp. 163–92). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Department of Linguistics.
Horn, L. (2004). Implicature. In L.R. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.),
The Handbook of Pragmatics
(pp. 3–28). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Huang, Y. & Snedeker, J. (2009). Semantic meaning and pragmatic interpretation in five-year olds: Evidence from real time spoken language comprehension.
Developmental Psychology
, 45(6), 1723–1739.
Katsos, N. (2008). The semantics/pragmatics interface from an experimental perspective: The case of scalar implicature.
Synthese
, 165, 358–401.
Katsos, N. (2009). Neither default nor particularised: Scalar implicature from a developmental perspective. In U. Sauerland & K. Yatsushiro (Eds.),
Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics
(pp. 51–73). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Katsos, N., Andrés Roqueta, C., Estevan, R.A.C., & Cummins, C. (2011). Are children with specific language impairment competent with the pragmatics and logic of quantification?
Cognition
, 119, 43–57.
Katsos, N., & Bishop, D.V.M. (2011). Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature.
Cognition
, 120, 67–81.
Katsos, N., & Smith, N. (2010). Pragmatic tolerance and speaker-comprehender asymmetries. In K. Franich, K.M. Iserman, & L.L. Keil (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 34th Annual Boston Conference in Language Development
(pp. 221–232). Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Levinson, S. (2000).
Presumptive Meanings
. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
de Marchena, A., Eigsti, I.-E., Worek, A., Emiko Ono, K. & Snedeker, J. (2011). Mutual exclusivity in autism spectrum disorders: Testing the pragmatic hypothesis.
Cognition
, 119(1), 96–113.
Markman, E.M. (1989).
Categorization and Naming in Children
. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Markman, E.M. (1990). Constraints Children Place on Word Meanings.
Cognitive Science
, 14, 57–77.
Markman, E.M., & Wachtel, G.F. (1988). Children’s use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words.
Cognitive Psychology
, 20, 121–157.
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston A., Tomasello, M. (2009). Pronoun co-referencing errors: Challenges for generativist and usage-based accounts.
Cognitive Linguistics
, 20(3), 599–626.
Noveck, I.A. (2001). When children are more logical than adults.
Cognition
, 86: 253–282.
Noveck, I.A., Chierchia, G., Chevaux, F., Guelminger, R., & Sylvestre, E. (2002).
Linguistic-pragmatic Factors in Interpreting Disjunctions
.
Thinking and Reasoning
, 8, 297–326.
Papafragou, A., & Musolino, J. (2003). Scalar implicatures: Experiments at the semantics/pragmatics interface.
Cognition
, 86, 253–282.
Papafragou, A., & Tantalou, N. (2004). Children’s computation of implicatures.
Language Acquisition
, 12(1), 71–82.
Paterson, K.B., Liversedge, L.P., White, D., Filik, R., & Jaz, K. (2005). Children’s interpretation of ambiguous focus in sentences with ‘‘only’’.
Language Acquisition
, 13(3), 253–284.
Pouscoulous, N., I. Noveck, G. Politzer, & Bastide, A. (2007). A developmental investigation of processing costs in implicature production.
Language Acquisition
, 14, 347–376.
Reinhart, T. (2004). The processing cost of reference-set computation: Acquisition of stress shift and focus.
Language Acquisition
, 12(2), 109–155.
Southgate, V., Chevallier, C., & Csibra, G. (2010). 17-month-olds appeal to false beliefs to interpret others’ communication.
Developmental Science
, 13(6), 907–912.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D.(1986/1995).
Relevance: Communication and Cognition
. Oxford: Blackwell.
Tomasello, M. (1992). The social bases of language development.
Social Development
, 1, 67–87.
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
, 28, 675–735.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Zhang, Jun & Yan Wu
2023.
Epistemic reasoning in pragmatic inferencing by non-native speakers: The case of scalar implicatures.
Second Language Research 39:3
► pp. 697 ff.
Schulze, Cornelia, Gerlind Grosse & Markus Spreer
2018.
Erwerb pragmatischer Fähigkeiten und mögliche Störungen (im Kindesalter). In
Handbuch Pragmatik,
► pp. 177 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.