| | |
Summary: I choose these two cases because they have been very widely discussed in the literature. In1
particular, scalar implicatures are at the heart of a very vigorous current debate about the structure
of the interpretative process. However, even if one is convinced that there are conversational
implicatures of the standard Gricean sort, one might not be convinced that these two cases are best
explained in Gricean terms. The enriched interpretation of coordination, for example, might seem
better explained within a general theory of coherence. Questions can also be raised about the
standard account of scalar implicatures. Happily for me, the argument I will present below is
unaffected by the question of whether these particular cases are correctly analyzed in Gricean terms.
The argument I will give is an argument that the principles for the calculation of conversational
implicatures are equally applicable to complete utterances with speech act force and to sub-parts of
utterances. Whether these principles are actually applied in any specific case is tangential to my
argument.
-1-
To appear in Klaus Petrus (ed.), Meaning and Analysis: New Essays on H. Paul Grice.
A Gricean View on Intrusive Implicatures
Mandy Simons
Carnegie Mellon University, Dept. of Philosophy
May 2007
Minor revisions: December 2009
0. Introduction
|
