Cover not available

In:Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition
Edited by Danielle Matthews
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 10] 2014
► pp. 183–198

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

Scalar Implicature

ORCiD logo with link
Published online: 26 June 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.10.11kat
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barner, D., & Bachrach, A. (2010). Inference and exact numerical representation in early language development. Cognitive Psychology , 60, 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, 87–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (2000). How Children Learn the Meanings of Words . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.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, 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). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1988). On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language , 15, 317–335. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast. Journal of Child Language , 17, 417–431. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2003). First Language Acquisition . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, G. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and Beyond (pp. 39–103). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity Implicature . Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2004). Implicature. In L.R. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 3–28). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katsos, N. (2008). The semantics/pragmatics interface from an experimental perspective: The case of scalar implicature. Synthese , 165, 358–401. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katsos, N., & Bishop, D.V.M. (2011). Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. Cognition , 120, 67–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive Meanings . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markman, E.M. (1989). Categorization and Naming in Children . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1990). Constraints Children Place on Word Meanings. Cognitive Science , 14, 57–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markman, E.M., & Wachtel, G.F. (1988). Children’s use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words. Cognitive Psychology , 20, 121–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, I.A. (2001). When children are more logical than adults. Cognition , 86: 253–282.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, I.A., Chierchia, G., Chevaux, F., Guelminger, R., & Sylvestre, E. (2002). Linguistic-pragmatic Factors in Interpreting Disjunctions . Thinking and Reasoning , 8, 297–326. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pouscoulous, N., I. Noveck, G. Politzer, & Bastide, A. (2007). A developmental investigation of processing costs in implicature production. Language Acquisition , 14, 347–376. 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
Southgate, V., Chevallier, C., & Csibra, G. (2010). 17-month-olds appeal to false beliefs to interpret others’ communication. Developmental Science , 13(6), 907–912. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D.(1986/1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition . Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992). The social bases of language development. Social Development , 1, 67–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Petit, Nicolas, Marie-Maude Geoffray Cassar & Matias Baltazar
2025. Some (but not all) Pragmatic Inferences are Difficult for Autistic Children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders DOI logo
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. DOI logo
Bleotu, Adina Camelia
2021. Deriving scalar implicatures with quantifiers by Romanian children. In L1 Acquisition and L2 Learning [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 65], ► pp. 331 ff. DOI logo
Schulze, Cornelia, Gerlind Grosse & Markus Spreer
2018. Erwerb pragmatischer Fähigkeiten und mögliche Störungen (im Kindesalter). In Handbuch Pragmatik, ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue