A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper, I give an analysis of neg-raising inferences as scalar impli- catures. The main motivation for this account as opposed to a presupposition-based approach like Gajewski (Linguist Philos 30(3):289–328, 2007) comes from the differ- ences between presuppositions and neg-raising inferences. In response to this issue, Gajewski (2007) argues that neg-raising predicates are soft presuppositional triggers and adopts the account of how their presuppositions arise by Abusch (J Semantics 27(1):1–44, 2010). However, I argue that there is a difference between soft trig- gers and neg-raising predicates in their behavior in embeddings; a difference that is straightforwardly accounted for in the present approach. Furthermore, by adopting Abusch’s (2010) account of soft triggers, Gajewski (2007) inherits the assumptions of a pragmatic principle of disjunctive closure and of a non-standard interaction between semantics and pragmatics—assumptions that are not needed by the present proposal, which is just based on a regular theory of scalar implicatures. I also show that the arguments that Gajewski (2007) presents in favor of the presuppositional account can be explained also by the scalar implicatures-based approach proposed here. Finally, while the main point of the paper is a comparison with the presuppositional account, I sketch a preliminary comparison with more syntactic approaches to neg-raising.
LanguageEnglish
Pages291-353
JournalLinguistics and Philosophy
Volume36
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 19 Sep 2013

Fingerprint

Scalar Implicatures
Presupposition
Trigger
Inference
Regular
Interaction
Closure
Syntax

Cite this

@article{94085825337e40c0942f65d96c4b82eb,
title = "A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising",
abstract = "In this paper, I give an analysis of neg-raising inferences as scalar impli- catures. The main motivation for this account as opposed to a presupposition-based approach like Gajewski (Linguist Philos 30(3):289–328, 2007) comes from the differ- ences between presuppositions and neg-raising inferences. In response to this issue, Gajewski (2007) argues that neg-raising predicates are soft presuppositional triggers and adopts the account of how their presuppositions arise by Abusch (J Semantics 27(1):1–44, 2010). However, I argue that there is a difference between soft trig- gers and neg-raising predicates in their behavior in embeddings; a difference that is straightforwardly accounted for in the present approach. Furthermore, by adopting Abusch’s (2010) account of soft triggers, Gajewski (2007) inherits the assumptions of a pragmatic principle of disjunctive closure and of a non-standard interaction between semantics and pragmatics—assumptions that are not needed by the present proposal, which is just based on a regular theory of scalar implicatures. I also show that the arguments that Gajewski (2007) presents in favor of the presuppositional account can be explained also by the scalar implicatures-based approach proposed here. Finally, while the main point of the paper is a comparison with the presuppositional account, I sketch a preliminary comparison with more syntactic approaches to neg-raising.",
author = "Jacopo Romoli",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1007/s10988-013-9136-2",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "291--353",
journal = "Linguistics and Philosophy",
issn = "0165-0157",
number = "4",

}

A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising. / Romoli, Jacopo.

In: Linguistics and Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 4, 19.09.2013, p. 291-353.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising

AU - Romoli, Jacopo

PY - 2013/9/19

Y1 - 2013/9/19

N2 - In this paper, I give an analysis of neg-raising inferences as scalar impli- catures. The main motivation for this account as opposed to a presupposition-based approach like Gajewski (Linguist Philos 30(3):289–328, 2007) comes from the differ- ences between presuppositions and neg-raising inferences. In response to this issue, Gajewski (2007) argues that neg-raising predicates are soft presuppositional triggers and adopts the account of how their presuppositions arise by Abusch (J Semantics 27(1):1–44, 2010). However, I argue that there is a difference between soft trig- gers and neg-raising predicates in their behavior in embeddings; a difference that is straightforwardly accounted for in the present approach. Furthermore, by adopting Abusch’s (2010) account of soft triggers, Gajewski (2007) inherits the assumptions of a pragmatic principle of disjunctive closure and of a non-standard interaction between semantics and pragmatics—assumptions that are not needed by the present proposal, which is just based on a regular theory of scalar implicatures. I also show that the arguments that Gajewski (2007) presents in favor of the presuppositional account can be explained also by the scalar implicatures-based approach proposed here. Finally, while the main point of the paper is a comparison with the presuppositional account, I sketch a preliminary comparison with more syntactic approaches to neg-raising.

AB - In this paper, I give an analysis of neg-raising inferences as scalar impli- catures. The main motivation for this account as opposed to a presupposition-based approach like Gajewski (Linguist Philos 30(3):289–328, 2007) comes from the differ- ences between presuppositions and neg-raising inferences. In response to this issue, Gajewski (2007) argues that neg-raising predicates are soft presuppositional triggers and adopts the account of how their presuppositions arise by Abusch (J Semantics 27(1):1–44, 2010). However, I argue that there is a difference between soft trig- gers and neg-raising predicates in their behavior in embeddings; a difference that is straightforwardly accounted for in the present approach. Furthermore, by adopting Abusch’s (2010) account of soft triggers, Gajewski (2007) inherits the assumptions of a pragmatic principle of disjunctive closure and of a non-standard interaction between semantics and pragmatics—assumptions that are not needed by the present proposal, which is just based on a regular theory of scalar implicatures. I also show that the arguments that Gajewski (2007) presents in favor of the presuppositional account can be explained also by the scalar implicatures-based approach proposed here. Finally, while the main point of the paper is a comparison with the presuppositional account, I sketch a preliminary comparison with more syntactic approaches to neg-raising.

U2 - 10.1007/s10988-013-9136-2

DO - 10.1007/s10988-013-9136-2

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 291

EP - 353

JO - Linguistics and Philosophy

T2 - Linguistics and Philosophy

JF - Linguistics and Philosophy

SN - 0165-0157

IS - 4

ER -