Scalar Implicature

Scalar implicatures arise when using a weaker term on a scale implicates that a stronger term does not hold, as when 'some' implicates 'not all'.

Definition

A scalar implicature is the inference, from the use of a weaker scalar term, that the speaker was not in a position to assert a stronger term on the same scale.

Scope

This topic covers the special case of quantity-based generalized implicature associated with ordered sets of alternatives (Horn scales) such as <some, all> or <or, and>. It treats the standard Gricean derivation, the neo-Gricean account of generalized conversational implicature, and the prominent debate over whether scalar implicatures are computed by a default pragmatic mechanism, by the grammar (a covert exhaustivity operator), or only on demand.

Core questions

• How does using a weaker scalar term implicate the denial of stronger alternatives?
• Which expressions form Horn scales, and how are alternatives determined?
• Are scalar implicatures default inferences or context-driven?
• Are scalar implicatures pragmatic or are they computed in the grammar?

Key concepts

• Horn scale
• scalar alternatives
• Q-principle / maxim of quantity
• generalized conversational implicature
• exhaustification
• embedded implicature

Key theories

Horn scales and the Q-principle

Scalar terms are ordered by informational strength; by the maxim of quantity, asserting a weaker term implicates that the speaker could not truthfully assert a stronger alternative.

Generalized conversational implicature (neo-Gricean)

Scalar implicatures are default, generalized inferences that arise unless cancelled, forming a level of presumptive meaning between semantics and particularized implicature.

Grammatical (exhaustivity-operator) theory

Scalar implicatures are computed within the grammar by an optional covert exhaustification operator, explaining their embedding behaviour and interaction with polarity.

History

Horn's 1972 dissertation introduced the notion of scales of lexical alternatives that underlie quantity implicatures. Levinson developed the neo-Gricean theory of generalized conversational implicature, treating scalar inferences as defaults, while from the early 2000s Chierchia and others argued that scalar implicatures are partly grammatical, sparking the localist-versus-globalist debate.

Debates

Globalist vs. localist (grammatical) theories

Whether scalar implicatures are computed globally by post-semantic pragmatic reasoning, or locally within the grammar by a covert exhaustivity operator that can apply to embedded constituents.

Key figures

• Laurence Horn
• Stephen Levinson
• Gennaro Chierchia

Seminal works

• horn1972
• levinson2000
• chierchia2004

Frequently asked questions

Why does 'some' often mean 'not all'?

Because 'some' and 'all' form a scale, and by the maxim of quantity a speaker who says 'some' is taken to imply they could not truthfully say 'all'; this is a cancellable scalar implicature, not part of the literal meaning of 'some'.