Default interpretations

Katarzyna M. Jaszczolt
Table of contents

At the current state of post-Gricean pragmatic research, it can be accepted without much controversy that communicators convey more information than is contained in the expressions they utter. Even a cursory glance at sentences (1)–(3) suffices to form an impression that they normally convey (1’)–(3’) respectively.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

References

Asher, N. & A. Lascarides
1995 Lexical disambiguation in a discourse context. Journal of Semantics 12: 69–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, N.A. Lascarides.
1998 The semantics and pragmatics of presupposition. Journal of Semantics 15: 239–300. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001 Indirect speech acts. Synthese 128: 183–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003 Logics of conversation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, K.
1984 Default reasoning: Jumping to conclusions and knowing when to think twice. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65: 37–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1987a Thought and reference. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1987b On communicative intentions: A reply to Récanati. Mind and Language 2: 141–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1994 Semantic slack: What is said and more. In S.L. Tsohatzidis (ed.) Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and linguistic perspectives: 267–291. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1995 Remark and reply. Standardization vs. conventionalization. Linguistics and Philosophy 18: 677–686. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998 Postscript (1995): Standardization revisited. In A. Kasher (ed.) Pragmatics: Critical concepts, vol. 4: 712–722. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, A.L. & R.K. Morris
2004 Implicature, relevance and default ragmatic inference. In I.A. Noveck & D. Sperber (eds.): 257–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blutner, R.
2000 Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation. Journal of Semantics 17: 189–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blutner, R. & H. Zeevat
2004 Editors’ introduction: Pragmatics in Optimality Theory. In R. Blutner & H. Zeevat (eds.) Optimality Theory and pragmatics: 1–24. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bultinck, B.
2005 Numerous meanings: The meaning of English cardinals and thelegacy of Paul Grice. Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, R.
1988 Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R.M. Kempson (ed.) Mental representations: The interface between language and reality: 155–181. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998a Postscript (1995) to Carston 1988. In A. Kasher (ed.) Pragmatics: Critical concepts, vol. 4: 464–479. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998b Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature. In R. Carston & S. Uchida (eds.) Relevance theory: Applications and implications: 179–236. Benjamins.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001 Relevance Theory and the saying/implicating distinction’. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 13: 1–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002a Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Blackwell.  MetBibGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002b Linguistic meaning, communicated meaning and cognitive pragmatics. Mind and Language 17: 127–148.  BoPGoogle 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: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 3: 39–103. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Damasio, A.R.
1999 How the brain creates the mind. Scientific American, December 1999: 74–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H.P.
1975 Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics, vol. 3. Academic Press. [Reprinted in H. P. Grice (1989) Studies in the way of words: 22–40. Harvard University Press.]  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L.R.
1984 Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schffrin (ed.) Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1984: 11–42. Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1988 Pragmatic theory. In F.J. Newmeyer (ed.) Linguistics: the Cambridge survey, vol. 1: 113–145. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1989 A natural history of negation. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1992 The said and the unsaid. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 40(SALT II Proceedings): 163–192.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004 Implicature. In L.R. Horn & G. Ward (eds.) The Handbook of pragmatics: 3–28. Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006 The border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. In K. Von Heusinger & K. Turner (eds.) Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics: The Michigan Papers: 21–48. Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Husserl, E.
1900–1901 Logische Untersuchungen, vol. 2. Max Niemeyer. [Reprinted in 1984 after the second edition (1913–21). Martinus Nijhoff. Husserliana 19/1. Transl. as Logical investigations by J. N. Findlay in 1970. Routledge and Kegan Paul.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
1990 Semantic structures. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1991 Parts and boundaries. Cognition 41. [Reprinted in B. Levin & S. Pinker (eds.) Lexical and conceptual semantics: 9–45. Blackwell.] Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, K.M.
1997 The Default De Re Principle for the interpretation of belief utterances. Journal of Pragmatics 28: 315–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998a Reports on beliefs: Default interpretations and default intentions. Journal of Literary Semantics 27: 31–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1998b Referring in discourse: Referential intention and the ‘taking for granted’ principle. Journal of Literary Semantics 27: 96–109.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1999a Default semantics, pragmatics, and intentions’. In K. Turner (ed.) The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points ofview: 199–232. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1999b Discourse, beliefs, and intentions: Semantic defaults and propositional attitude ascription. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000a Belief reports and pragmatic theory: The state of the art. In K.M. Jaszczolt (ed.) The pragmatics of propositional attitude reports: 1–12. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000b The default-based context-dependence of belief reports. In K.M. Jaszczolt (ed.). The pragmatics of propositional attitude reports: 169–185. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002 Semantics and pragmatics: Meaning in language and discourse. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005a Default Semantics: Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005b Prolegomena to Default Semantics. In S. Marmaridou, K. Nikiforidou & E. Antonopoulou (eds.) Reviewing linguistic thought: Converging trends for the 21st Century: 107–142. Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamp, H. & U. Reyle
1993 From discourse to logic: Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Kluwer.  BoP Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koenig, J. -P.
1993 Scalar predicates and negation: Punctual semantics and interval interpretations. Chicago Linguistic Society 27 Part, The Parasession on Negation: 140–155.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landman, F.
2000 Events and plurality. Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lascarides, A. & N. Asher
1993 Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 437–493.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lascarides, A. & J. Oberlander
1993 Temporal coherence and defeasible knowledge. Theoretical Linguistics 19: 1–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S.C.
1987 Minimization and conversational inference. In J. Verschueren & M. Bertuccelli-Papi (eds.) The pragmatic perspective. Selected papers from the 1985 International Pragmatics Conference: 61–129. J. Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1995 Three levels of meaning. In F.R. Palmer (ed.) Grammar and meaning. Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons: 90–115. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000 Presumptive meanings: The theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003 Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, W.
1995 Approaches to intentionality. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musolino, J.
2004 The semantics and acquisition of number words: Integrating linguistic and developmental perspectives. Cognition 93: 1–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, I.A.
2001 When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition 78: 165–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004 Pragmatic inferences related to logical terms. In I.A. Noveck & D. Sperber (eds.): 301–321.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noveck, I.A. & D. Sperber
(eds.) 2004 Experimental pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papafragou, A. & J. Musolino
2003 Scalar implicatures: Experiments at the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognition 86: 253–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Récanati, F.
1989 The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language 4. [Reprinted in S. Davis (ed.) 1991. Pragmatics: A reader: 97–120. Oxford University Press.]  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002 Does linguistic communication rest on inference? Mind and Language 17: 105–126.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003 Embedded implicatures. http://​jeannicod​.ccsd​.cnrs​.fr​/documents.
2004 Literal meaning. Cambridge University Press.  MetBibGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Der Sandt, R.A.
1992 Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics 9: 333–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saul, J.M.
2002 What is said and psychological reality; Grice’s project and relevance theorists’ criticisms. Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 347–372. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, J.R.
1983 Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson
1986 Relevance: Communication and cognition. Blackwell. [Reprinted in 1995, 2nd edition.]  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L.
1985 Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (ed.) Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 3, Grammatical categories and the lexicon: 57–149. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000 Toward a cognitive semantics (2 vols.). MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Veltman, F.
1996 Defaults in update semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25: 221–261. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeevat, H.
2000 Demonstratives in discourse. Journal of Semantics 16: 279–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004 Particles: Presupposition triggers, context markers or speech act markers. In R. Blutner, & H. Zeevat (eds). Optimality Theory and pragmatics. 91–111. Palgrave Macmillan Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
 
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue