The study of the acquisition of pragmatic inferences as an element in the choice between theoretical models in dispute

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2017.3.29369

Keywords:

Presupposition, Scalar quantity implicature, Pragmatic inferences processing, Pragmatic inferences acquisition

Abstract

Phenomenon known for its ambivalent behavior, presupposition has been challenging some generations of linguists regarding two complementary problems: the presupposition projection problem and the problem about the source of presuppositions. Although the descriptive problem has received more attention, it is impossible to cope with it without assuming some position regarding the explanatory problem, associated to the source of presuppositional inferences. The noticeable divergence related to the presupposition projection descriptions is in contrast, however, to a certain consensus, historically built, about the nature of presuppositions. According to this consensus, presupposition is a conventional phenomenon, affected only in its projection by conversational linguistic aspects. Recently, that consensus has been shaken by a new wave of researches that, in different ways, has started to advocate the idea that presupposition is a phenomenon essentially conversational. Among those proposals, it deserves attention for its plausibility the one that associate presupposition to scalar quantity implicature. Both forms to take into account presuppositions, nevertheless, allow different predictions regarding their processing patterns. Focused on the confirmation of one of these hypothesis, some experimental studies had been carried out in order to assess how presuppositions and scalars implicatures are processed. The results obtained have been an important part in the discussion about the explanatory problem of presuppositions. This article revisits some experiments that explore the processing of presuppositions and scalar implicatures, and try to appreciate the importance, in the general context of the debate, of the works which investigate the way subjects in the acquisition stage process pragmatic inferences. What it shows is that the evidences obtained may be seen as supporting some models or, alternatively, as clues aimed to the improvement of the models which they, at a first glance, seems to falsify.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ABUSCH, Dorit. Lexical alternatives as a source of pragmatic presuppositions. In: SALT XII, 2002, Ithaca. Proceedings. Ithaca, 2002. p. 1-19.

BILL, C.; ROMOLI, J.; SCHWARZ, F. Scalar implicatures versus presuppositions: The view from acquisition. Topoi, v. 35, n. 1, p. 57-71, 2016.

BILL, C.; ROMOLI, J.; SCHWARZ, F. Are some presuppositions scalar implicatures? Assessing evidence from Reaction Times. (manuscrito)

BOTT, L.; NOVECK, I. A. Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, v. 51, p. 437-457, 2004.

CHEMLA, E.; BOTT, L. Processing presuppositions: Dynamic semantics vs pragmatic enrichment. Language and cognitive processes, v. 28, n. 3, p. 241-260, 2013.

CHIERCHIA, G.; McCONNELL-GINET, S. Meaning and grammar. Massachussets: MIT, 1990.

CHIERCHIA, G.; FOX, D.; SPECTOR, B. Scalar implicatures as a grammatical phenomenon. In: MAIENBORN, C.; HEUSINGER, K. V.; PORTNER, P. Semantics: an international handbook of natural language meaning. Vol. 3. Göttingen: De Gruiter Mouton, 2012. p. 2297-2331.

HORN, L. A natural history of negation. Stanford: CSLI, 1989. HUANG, Y. T.; SNEDEKER, J. Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology, v. 58, p. 376-415, 2009.

KAMP, H.; REYLE, U. From discourse to logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1993.

LEVINSON, Stephen C. Presumptive meanings. Massachusetts: MIT, 2000.

NOVECK, I. A. When children are more logical than adults: experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition, v. 78, p. 165-188, 2001.

OLIVEIRA, R. P.; BASSO, R. M. Arquitetura da conversação: teoria das implicaturas. São Paulo: Parábola, 2014.

ROMOLI, Jacopo. The presuppositions of soft triggers are not presuppositions. In: SALT 21., 2011, New Brunswick, Proceedings. New Brunswick: Rutgers University, 2011. p. 1-15.

ROMOLI, Jacopo. Soft but Strong: Neg-raising, soft triggers, and exhaustification. 267 f. Thesis – Harvard University, 2012.

ROMOLI, Jacopo. The presuppositions of soft triggers are obligatory scalar implicatures. Journal of Semantics, v. 32, p. 173-219, 2015.

SAUERLAND, U. Scalar implicatures in complex sentences. Linguistics and Philosophy, v. 27, p. 367-391, 2004.

SIMONS, Mandy. On the conversational basis of some presuppositions. Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT 11), 2001.

SOAMES, Scott. How pressupositions are inherited: a solution to the projection problem. In: DAVIS, Steven. Pragmatics: a reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. p. 428-470.

Published

2017-12-07

How to Cite

Goldnadel, M. (2017). The study of the acquisition of pragmatic inferences as an element in the choice between theoretical models in dispute. Letras De Hoje, 52(3), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2017.3.29369