Intro to Semantics and Pragmatics Unit 8 ReviewImplicature and Presupposition

Key Concepts

• Implicature conveys additional meaning beyond literal semantic content of utterances
• Presupposition refers to implicit assumptions speakers make when producing utterances
• Grice's Cooperative Principle outlines four maxims (quantity, quality, relation, manner) governing conversation
• Conventional implicature derives from specific words or phrases (but, even, too)
• Conversational implicature arises from contextual factors and can be particularized or generalized
• Presupposition triggers include definite descriptions, factive verbs, change of state verbs, iteratives, and cleft constructions
• Accommodation allows listeners to accept presuppositions not previously part of common ground
• Presupposition projection explains how presuppositions of complex sentences relate to those of component clauses

Defining Implicature and Presupposition

• Implicature refers to implied meaning not directly stated in utterances
• Presupposition involves unstated assumptions speakers make when producing utterances
• Implicature and presupposition rely on shared knowledge and context for interpretation
• Grice distinguishes between "what is said" (semantics) and "what is implicated" (pragmatics)
• Presuppositions typically survive negation and questioning of containing utterances (The King of France is not bald still presupposes France has a king)
• Implicatures are cancellable without contradiction while presuppositions are not (I ate some of the cookies implicates not eating all, but this can be cancelled: In fact, I ate all of them)
• Both implicature and presupposition contribute to efficient communication by allowing speakers to convey information without stating it explicitly

Types of Implicature

• Conventional implicature derives from meaning of specific words (but, even, too)
  • "Even John passed the test" implicates John was unlikely to pass
  • "Mary is poor but honest" implicates an unexpected contrast between poverty and honesty
• Conversational implicature depends on context and Gricean maxims
  • Generalized conversational implicatures arise in absence of special circumstances (Some implicates not all)
  • Particularized conversational implicatures require specific contextual factors (Saying "The weather is nice" to a host may implicate "Let's go outside")
• Scalar implicature is a type of generalized conversational implicature involving scales (some/all, might/must)
  • "Some students passed" implicates not all students passed due to the maxim of quantity
• Relevance implicature arises when an utterance flouts the maxim of relation
  • Responding "I have to study" when asked to go out implicates refusing the invitation

Types of Presupposition

• Existential presuppositions assume existence of referents (The King of France presupposes France has a king)
• Factive presuppositions arise from factive verbs (know, regret, realize)
  • "John regrets smoking" presupposes John smoked
• Lexical presuppositions are triggered by specific words (stop, start, continue)
  • "John stopped smoking" presupposes John previously smoked
• Structural presuppositions result from certain syntactic structures (clefts, wh-questions)
  • "It was John who broke the vase" presupposes someone broke the vase
• Non-factive presuppositions involve verbs like dream, imagine, pretend
  • "Mary dreamed she won the lottery" does not presuppose Mary won the lottery
• Counterfactual presuppositions arise from counterfactual conditionals
  • "If I were rich, I would travel more" presupposes I am not rich

Theoretical Frameworks

• Grice's Cooperative Principle and conversational maxims (quantity, quality, relation, manner) provide foundation for implicature
• Neo-Gricean approaches (Horn, Levinson) reformulate Grice's maxims
  • Horn's Q and R principles relate to quantity and relevance
  • Levinson's Q, I, and M heuristics correspond to quantity, informativeness, and manner
• Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson) treats relevance as key factor in implicature derivation
  • Utterances raise expectations of relevance warranting processing effort
• Dynamic Semantics views meaning as potential to change context
  • Presuppositions are treated as requirements on input contexts
• Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp) uses discourse representation structures to model presupposition and accommodation
• Accommodation (Lewis) explains how presuppositions not already accepted become part of common ground

Real-World Applications

• Advertising often uses implicature to suggest product benefits without explicitly stating them
  • "The world's most popular soft drink" implicates high quality and desirability
• Political speech relies on implicature to convey messages while maintaining deniability
  • "My opponent has no experience in foreign policy" implicates the opponent is unqualified without directly stating it
• Presupposition can be used to manipulate discourse and influence opinions
  • Asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" presupposes the addressee has beaten their wife
• Understanding implicature and presupposition is crucial for successful cross-cultural communication
  • Different cultures may have different norms for what is implicated or presupposed in conversation
• Analyzing implicature and presupposition can provide insight into speaker beliefs and attitudes
  • Presupposing something as fact can reveal a speaker's biases or assumptions
• Natural language processing systems must account for implicature and presupposition to correctly interpret user input
  • A search for "cheap hotels in Paris" presupposes the existence of hotels in Paris and implicates the user's price preferences

Common Challenges and Misconceptions

• Implicatures can be difficult to identify and interpret, especially across cultures or in written communication lacking nonverbal cues
• Presuppositions are not always easy to distinguish from entailments or logical implications
  • "John's brother is bald" entails John has a brother, while "John's dog is cute" presupposes John has a dog
• Presupposition projection in complex sentences can lead to confusion
  • "If John has a sister, his sister is blonde" does not presuppose John has a sister, despite "John's sister" typically triggering this presupposition
• The line between semantics and pragmatics is not always clear, leading to debate over the nature of implicature and presupposition
• Some argue that implicature and presupposition should be explained in purely pragmatic terms, while others maintain they have a semantic component
• Accommodation is not always straightforward, and listeners may sometimes fail to accommodate presuppositions, leading to misunderstanding
• The Cooperative Principle and conversational maxims are not always followed in real-world conversation, complicating implicature derivation

Further Reading and Resources

• Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
• Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Horn, L. R. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications (pp. 11-42). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
• Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Karttunen, L. (1973). Presuppositions of compound sentences. Linguistic Inquiry, 4(2), 169-193.
• Kamp, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language (pp. 277-322). Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre Tracts.
• Beaver, D. I., & Geurts, B. (2014). Presupposition. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/presupposition/
• Potts, C. (2015). Presupposition and implicature. In S. Lappin & C. Fox (Eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory (2nd ed., pp. 168-202). Wiley-Blackwell.