Cover not available

Article published In: Chinese Language and Discourse
Vol. 17:1 (2026) ► pp.86–132

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Modeling scalar implicature processing in Mandarin

A study on gradable adjectives and closed-class words

ORCiD logo with link | National Taiwan Normal University
ORCiD logo with link | National Taiwan Normal University
ORCiD logo with link | National Taiwan Normal University
Published online: 8 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cld.25002.yu
Abstract
The present study aims to examine which cognitive processing model, namely the Default Model, Context-driven Model, or Standardization Model, offers the most effective explanation for how native Mandarin speakers process scalar implicatures. The experiment in the current study employs a forced-choice task to investigate whether native Mandarin speakers interpret scalar terms literally or pragmatically by having participants complete dialogues containing these terms, which were then analyzed for their scalar implicature interpretation rates and response times. The experimental materials contain gradable adjective pairs re/tang ‘hot/scalding’ and hao/youxiu ‘good/excellent’ as well as closed-class pairs youxie/suoyou ‘some/all’ and huo/he ‘or/and’ placed in three distinct types of contexts, specifically upper-bounded context, lower-bounded context and neutral context. The preliminary results show that the processing of both gradable adjective pairs is best explained by the Standardization Model while that of the two closed-class pairs best fits the predictions of the Default Model.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Implicatures in Gricean, neo-Gricean and post-Gricean theory
    • 2.2Review of empirical studies on scalar implicature processing models
      • 2.2.1Empirical studies supporting the default model
      • 2.2.2Empirical studies supporting the context-driven model
      • 2.2.3Empirical studies supporting the standardization model
    • 2.3Gradable adjectives and closed-class words in Mandarin
      • 2.3.1Gradable adjectives in Mandarin
      • 2.3.2Closed-class words in Mandarin
    • 2.4Goals of the current study
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Apparatus
    • 3.3Design
      • 3.3.1Selection of experimental materials
      • 3.3.2Design of context
      • 3.3.3Design of experimental items
      • 3.3.4Immediate post-test survey
    • 3.4Experimental procedure
      • 3.4.1Procedure
      • 3.4.2Presentation of experimental stimuli
    • 3.5Data analysis
    • 3.6Predictions
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1re/tang ‘hot/scalding’
    • 4.2hao/youxiu ‘good/excellent’
    • 4.3youxie/suoyou ‘some/all’
    • 4.4huo/he ‘or/and’
    • 4.5Summary of results
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Gradable adjectives re/tang ‘hot/scalding’ and hao/youxiu ‘good/excellent’
    • 5.2Closed-class words youxie/suoyou ‘some/all’ and huo/he ‘or/and’
    • 5.3Questions Under Discussion (QUD) and context
    • 5.4The unpredictability of Neutral Context (NC)
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (66)
References
Bach, Kent. 1998. “Standardization Revisited.” In Pragmatics: Critical Concepts, ed. by Asa Kasher, 712–722. London: Routeledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Context dependence (such as it is).” In The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Language, ed. by Manuel Garcia-Carpintero, and Max Kölbel, 153–184. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, Kent, and Robert M. Harnish. 1992. “How Performatives Really Work: A Reply to Searle.” Linguistics and Philosophy 151: 93–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bain, Lee J., and Max Engelhardt. 1992. Introduction to Probability and Mathematical Statistics, 2nd ed. Belmont: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Rachel, Ryan Doran, Yaron McNabb, Meredith Larson, and Gregory Ward. 2009. “On the Non-unified Nature of Scalar Implicature: An Empirical Investigation.” International Review of Pragmatics 1 (2): 211–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beltrama, Andrea, and Ming Xiang. 2013. “Is ‘Good’ Better Than ‘Excellent’? An Experimental Investigation on Scalar Implicatures and Gradable Adjectives.” Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 171: 81–98.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, Anne, and J. Cooper Cutting. 2002. “Literal Meaning, Minimal Propositions, and Pragmatic Processing.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (4): 433–456. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bott, Lewis, and Emmanuel Chemla. 2016. “Shared and Distinct Mechanisms in Deriving Linguistic Enrichment.” Journal of Memory and Language 911: 117–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bott, Lewis, and Ira A. Noveck. 2004. “Some Utterances are Underinformative: The Onset and Time Course of Scalar Inferences.” Journal of Memory and Language 51 (3): 437–457. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breheny, Richard, Napoleon Katsos, and John Williams. 2006. “Are Generalised Scalar Implicatures Generated by Default? An On-line Investigation Into the Role of Context in Generating Pragmatic Inferences.” Cognition 100 (3): 434–463. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1998. “Informativeness, Relevance and Scalar Implicature.” In Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications, ed. by Robyn Carston, and Seiji Uchida, 179–238. Amsterdam: Benjamins, Amsterdam. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiang, Chia-Ling. 2016. “A Comparative Analysis of the Semantic Meaning Patterns of ‘OR’ in Physics Texts in English and Mandarin Chinese.” Journal of Educational Practice and Research 29 (2): 33–64.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. “Scalar Implicatures, Polarity Phenomena, and the Syntax/Pragmatics Interface.” In Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Vol. 31, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 39–103. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro, Danny Fox, and Benjamin Spector. 2013. “The Grammatical View of Scalar Implicatures and the Relationship Between Semantics and Pragmatics.” In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. Vol. 31, ed. by Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner, 2297–2332. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cook, Jiyon. 2014. “Context, Expectation and Conversational Implicature: A Pragmatic Analysis of Good.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4 (5): 857–864. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doran, Ryan, Gregory Ward, Meredith Larson, Yaron McNabb, and Rachel E. Baker. 2012. “A Novel Experimental Paradigm for Distinguishing Between What is Said and What is Implicated.” Language 88 (1): 124–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dorjee, Dusana, Merrill F. Garrett, and Robert M. Harnish. 2013. “Mandatory Processing of Implied Content: Lessons From Context Effects on Implictures.” International Review of Pragmatics 5 (2): 217–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feeney, Aidan, Susan Scrafton, Amber Duckworth, and Simon J. Handley. 2004. “The Story of Some: Everyday Pragmatic Inference by Children and Adults.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 58 (2): 121–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrett, Merrill, and Robert M. Harnish. 2007. “Experimental Pragmatics: Testing for Implicitures.” Pragmatics and Cognition 15 (1): 65–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gotzner, Nicole, Stephanie Solt, and Anton Benz. 2018. “Scalar Diversity, Negative Strengthening, and Adjectival Semantics.” Frontiers in Psychology 91: 1659. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1968. “Utterer’s Meaning, Sentence Meaning and Word Meaning.” Foundations of Language 41: 225–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” In: Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 31, ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry Morgan, 41–58. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. “Presupposition and Conversational Implicature.” In Radical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole, 183–197. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grodner, Daniel J., Natalie M. Klein, Kathleen M. Carbary, and Michael K. Tanenhaus. 2010. “‘Some,’ and Possibly All, Scalar Inferences are Not Delayed: Evidence for Immediate Pragmatic Enrichment.” Cognition 116 (1): 42–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1972. “On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English.” Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
1984. “Towards a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-and R-based Implicature.” In Meaning, Form and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications, ed. by Deborah Schiffrin, 11–42. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1989. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, Shenai, Peng Zhou, Francesca Foppolo, Maria Vender, and Denis Delfitto. 2019. “Scalar Implicatures in Chinese Children With Reading Difficulties.” First Language 39 (5): 479–507. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, Yi Ting, and Jesse Snedeker. 2018. “Some Inferences Still Take Time: Prosody, Predictability, and the Speed of Scalar Implicatures.” Cognitive Psychology 1021: 105–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katsos, Napoleon, Richard Breheny, and John Williams. 2005. “Interaction of Structural and Contextual Constraints During the On-Line Generation of Scalar Inferences.” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 271: 1108–1113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 2007. “Vagueness and Grammar: The Semantics of Relative and Absolute Gradable Adjectives.” Linguistics and Philosophy 301: 1–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher, and Louise McNally. 2005. “Scale Structure, Degree Modification, and the Semantics of Gradable Predicates.” Language 81 (2): 345–381. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. “Minimization and Conversational Inference.” In The Pragmatic Perspective, ed. by Jef Verschueren, and Marcella Bertuccelli Papi, 61–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, Jingxia, and Jeeyong Peck. 2016. “Classification of Mandarin Chinese Simple Adjectives: A Scale-based Analysis of Their Quantitative Denotations.” Language and Linguistics 17 (6): 827–855.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Si, and Jianan Liu. 2017. “Processing Scalar Implicatures in Mandarin Chinese: Testing the Processing Models.” International Journal of Linguistics 9 (3): 115–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lü, Shuxiang (ed). 1980. Xiandai Hanyu Babai Ci [800 Words in Modern Chinese]. Beijing: Commercial Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luo, Qiongpeng. 2018. “Gradability, Scale Structure and Classification of Simple Adjectives in Chinese.” Chinese Language Learning (1): 27–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morzycki, Marcin. 2012. “Adjectival Extremeness: Degree Modification and Contextually Restricted Scales.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 301: 567–609. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Notley, Anna, Peng Zhou, Britta Jensen, and Stephen Crain. 2012. “Children’s Interpretation of Disjunction in the Scope of ‘Before’: A Comparison of English and Mandarin.” Journal of Child Language 39 (3): 482–522. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, Ira A. 2001. “When Children are More Logical Than Adults: Experimental Investigations of Scalar Implicature.” Cognition 78 (2): 165–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, Ira A., and Andres Posada. 2003. “Characterizing the Time Course of an Implicature: An Evoked Potentials Study.” Brain and Language 85 (2): 203–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, Anna, and Julien Musolino. 2003. “Scalar Implicatures: Experiments at the Semantics–Pragmatics Interface.” Cognition 86 (3): 253–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Politzer-Ahles, Stephen, and E. Matthew Husband. 2018. “Eye Movement Evidence for Context-sensitive Derivation of Scalar Inferences.” Collabra: Psychology 4 (1): 3. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rees, Alice, and Lewis Bott. 2018. “The Role of Alternative Salience in the Derivation of Scalar Implicatures.” Cognition 1761: 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige. 1996/2012. “Information Structure: Towards an Integrated Formal Theory of Pragmatics.” Semantics and Pragmatics 51: 6.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ronai, Eszter, and Ming Xiang. 2021. “Pragmatic Inferences are QUD-sensitive: An Experimental Study.” Journal of Linguistics 57 (4): 841–870. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sauerland, Uli. 2012. “The Computation of Scalar Implicatures: Pragmatic, Lexical or Grammatical?” Language and Linguistics Compass 6 (1): 36–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 2006. “After Grice: Neo-and Post-perspectives.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (12): 2223–2234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shi, Yuzhi. 2003. The Effect of the Quantity Properties of Adjectives on Their Syntactic Behaviors. Chinese Teaching in the World (2): 13–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skordos, Dimitrios, and Anna Papafragou. 2016. “Children’s Derivation of Scalar Implicatures: Alternatives and Relevance.” Cognition 1531: 6–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starr, Glenn, and Jacee Cho. 2022. “QUD Sensitivity in the Computation of Scalar Implicatures in Second Language Acquisition.” Language Acquisition 29 (2): 182–197. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Su, Yi Esther. 2013. “Scalar Implicatures and Downward Entailment in Child Mandarin.” Journal of East Asian Linguistics 22 (2): 167–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “The Acquisition of Logical connectives in Child Mandarin.” Language Acquisition 21 (2): 119–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Su, Yi Esther, and Yuhan Jiang. 2024. “Challenges With Computing Scalar and Ad-hoc Implicatures in Mandarin-speaking 4–8-year-old Autistic Children.” Journal of Communication Disorders 1101: 106427. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Su, Yi Esther, and Lin-Yan Su. 2015. “Interpretation of Logical Words in Mandarin-Speaking Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Uncovering Knowledge of Semantics and Pragmatics.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 451: 1938–1950. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomlinson Jr., John M., Todd M. Bailey, and Lewis Bott. 2013. “Possibly All of That and Then Some: Scalar Implicatures are Understood in Two Steps.” Journal of Memory and Language 69 (1): 18–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan. 2003. “Three types of existential quantification in Chinese.” In Form, Interpretation and Functional Structure: Perspectives from Asian Languages, ed. by Audrey Li, and Andrew Simpson, 161–179. London: Curzon/Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “On ‘you ren’, ‘you de ren’ and ‘you xie ren’.” Chinese Linguistics (2): 16–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Tiel, Bob, Emiel van Miltenburg, Natalia Zevakhina, and Bart Geurts. 2016. “Scalar Diversity.” Journal of Semantics 33 (1): 137–175.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2017. “Relevance Theory.” In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Yan Huang, 79–100. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Xiao, Utako Minai, and Robert Fiorentino. 2018. “Context-sensitivity and Individual Differences in the Derivation of Scalar Implicature.” Frontiers in Psychology 91: 1720. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, Jun, and Yan Wu. 2020. “Only Youxie Think it is a Nice Thing to Say: Interpreting Scalar Items in Face-threatening Contexts by Native Chinese Speakers.” Journal of Pragmatics 1681: 19–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zondervan, Arjen J. 2010. “Scalar Implicatures or Focus: An Experimental Approach.” Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University.
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue