Cover not available

In:L1 Acquisition and L2 Learning: The view from Romance
Edited by Larisa Avram, Anca Sevcenco and Veronica Tomescu
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 65] 2021
► pp. 331–354

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

Chapter 13
Deriving scalar implicatures with quantifiers by Romanian children

 | ICUB, University of Bucharest
Published online: 17 November 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.65.13ble
Abstract
The present study looks at whether 7–9-year-old Romanian monolingual children generate fewer implicatures than adults (Noveck, 2001) when interpreting two existential plural quantifiers (unii ‘some1’ and cȃţiva ‘some2’). The results reveal that 7-year-olds derive scalar implicatures with existential quantifiers less frequently than 9-year-olds, who, in turn, derive them less frequently than adults. Moreover, subjects behaved the same with unii ‘some1’ and cȃţiva ‘some2’, i.e., the semantic differences between the two existential quantifiers seem to be immaterial to scalarity computation.
Article outline
  • 1.Aim
  • 2.Scalar implicatures in communication
    • 2.1Inferring the unsaid
    • 2.2Scalar implicatures in a nutshell
  • 3.The acquisition of quantifiers and scalar implicatures
    • 3.1A brief history
    • 3.2Developmental accounts of scalar implicatures
  • 4.Scalar implicatures in child Romanian: An experimental study
    • 4.1Aim
    • 4.2Existential quantifiers in Romanian: Predictions for acquisition
    • 4.3Method
      • 4.3.1Participants
      • 4.3.2Materials
      • 4.3.3Procedure
      • 4.3.4Results
    • 4.4Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • References
  • Appendix
  • Legend
References (31)
References
Barner, D., & Bachrach, A. (2010). Inference and exact numerical representation in early language development. Cognitive Psychology, 60(1), 40–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barner, D., Brooks, N., & Bale, A. (2011). Accessing the unsaid: The role of scalar alternatives in children’s pragmatic inference. Cognition, 118(1), 87–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bott, L., & Noveck, I. A. (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
Carston, R. (1998). Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature. In R. Carston & S. Uchida (Eds.), Relevance theory: Applications and implications (pp. 179–236). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, G. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatic interface. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and beyond (pp. 39–103). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the “logicality” of language. Linguistic Inquiry, 37(4), 535–590. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, G., Fox, D., & Spector, B. (2012). 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 (pp. 2297–2331). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crain, S., & Thornton, R. (1998). Investigations in Universal Grammar: A guide to experiments on syntax and semantics. The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foppolo, F., Guasti, M. T., & Chierchia, G. (2012). Scalar implicatures in child language: Give children a chance. Language Learning and Development, 8(4), 365–394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, D. (2007). Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In U. Sauerland & P. Stateva (Eds.), Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics (pp. 71–120). Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gazdar, G. (1979). Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. (1972). On the semantic properties of logical operators in English (Unpublished PhD dissertation) University of California, Los Angeles.
Katsos, N. (2014). Scalar implicature. In D. Matthews (Ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition (pp. 183–198). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katsos, N. & Bishop, D. (2011). Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. Cognition, 120(1), 67–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings. The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1867). An examination of Sir William Hamilton’s philosophy (3rd ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, I. (2001). When children are more logical than adults, Cognition, 78(2), 165–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., & Musolino, J. (2003). Scalar implicatures: Experiments at the semantics – pragmatics interface, Cognition, 86(3), 253–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., & Tantalou, N. (2004). Children’s computation of implicatures. Language Acquisition, 12(1), 71–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pouscoulous, N., Noveck, I., Politzer, G., & Bastide, A. (2007). A developmental investigation of processing costs in implicature production, Language Acquisition, 14(4), 347–375. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (2004). The processing cost of reference-set computation: Acquisition of stress shift and focus. Language Acquisition, 12(2), 109–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sauerland, U. (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
Smith, C. (1980). Quantifiers and question answering in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 30(2), 191–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stoicescu, I., Sevcenco, A., & Avram, L. (2013). The acquisition of scalar implicatures: A clinical marker of developmental dyslexia in Romanian? In L. Avram & A. Sevcenco (Eds.), Topics in language acquisition and language learning in a Romanian context. Selected papers from Bucharest Colloquium of Language Acquisition (BUCLA), 15–16 December 2011 (pp. 161–181). Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). The acquisition of scalar implicatures in child Romanian. In M. Burada & O. Tatu (Eds). 11th conference on British and American studies: Embracing multitudes of meaning (pp. 141–155). Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue