Richard Breheny

A New Look at the Semantics and Pragmatics of Numerically Quantified Noun Phrases

This paper presents some arguments against a unilateral account of numerically quantified noun phrases (NQNPs) and for a bilateral account of such expressions. It is proposed that where NQNP give rise to at least readings, this is the result of one of the two forms of pragmatic reasoning. To that end, the paper develops an independently motivated account of specificity and existential closure involving diagonalization.

Investigating the timecourse of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation

Many contextual inferences in utterance interpretation are explained as following from the nature of conversation and the assumption that participants are rational. Recent psycholinguistic research has focused on certain of these “Gricean” inferences and have revealed that comprehenders can access them in online interpretation. However, there have been mixed results as to the time course of access. Some results show that Gricean inferences can be accessed very rapidly, as rapidly as any other contextually specified information; while other studies looking at the same kind of inference suggest that access to Gricean inferences are delayed relative to other aspects of semantic interpretation. While previous timecourse research has focused on Gricean inferences that support the online assignment of reference to definite expressions, the study reported here examines the timecourse of access to scalar implicatures, which enrich the meaning of an utterance beyond the semantic interpretation. Even if access to Gricean inference in support of reference assignment may be rapid, it is still unknown whether genuinely enriching scalar implicatures are delayed. Our results indicate that scalar implicatures are accessed as rapidly as other contextual inferences. The implications of our results are discussed in reference to the architecture of language comprehension.

Why We Simulate Negated Information: A Dynamic Pragmatic Account:

A well-established finding in the simulation literature is that participants simulate the positive argument of negation soon after reading a negative sentence, prior to simulating a scene consistent with the negated sentence (Kaup, Lüdtke, & Zwaan, 2006; Kaup, Yaxley, Madden, Zwaan, & Lüdtke, 2007). One interpretation of this finding is that negation requires two steps to process: first represent what is being negated then “reject” that in favour of a representation of a negation-consistent state of affairs (Kaup et al., 2007). In this paper we argue that this finding with negative sentences could be a by-product of the dynamic way that language is interpreted relative to a common ground and not the way that negation is represented. We present a study based on Kaup et al. (2007) that tests the competing accounts. Our results suggest that some negative sentences are not processed in two steps, but provide support for the alternative, dynamic account.

Dynamic Pragmatic View of Negation Processing

Many psycholinguistic studies have found that processing negative sentences is difficult, and often involves the representation of the positive argument. Current rejection accounts suggest that processing the positive argument is the mandatory first step of negation processing, and the difficulty of negation comes from the extra step of embedding. We argue for a dynamic pragmatic view, suggesting that even when processing a sentence without context, comprehenders retrieve contextual information such as its Question Under Discussion (QUD), using linguistic cues. Without supporting context, negation acts as a cue for retrieving and accommodating the most prominent QUD, where the truth of the positive counterpart is at issue. QUD accommodation happens incrementally and automatically, which triggers the representation of the positive argument and contributes to the extra processing cost related to negation.

Processing negation without context – why and when we represent the positive argument

ABSTRACT When processing negative sentences without context, participants often represent states of the positive arguments. Why and when does this occur? Using visual world eye-tracking, participants listened to positive and negative sentences in simple or cleft forms (e.g., [It is] Matt [who] hasn’t shut his dad’s window), while looking at scenes containing a target and a competitor (matches or mismatches the implied shape of the final noun). Results show that in the simple but not the cleft condition, there is a difference between negatives and positives: shortly after the verb, there is more looks to the competitor in the simple negatives than the positives. This suggests that the representation of the positive is not a mandatory first step of negation processing (as per rejection accounts). Rather results support the Question Under Discussion (QUD) accommodation account wherein both sentence content and contextual source of relevance are targets of incremental sentence processing.

A Link Between Local Pragmatic Enrichment and Scalar Diversity

Several recent studies have shown that different scalar terms are liable to give rise to scalar inferences at different rates (Doran et al., 2009, 2012; van Tiel et al., 2016). A number of potential factors have been explored to account for such Scalar Diversity. These factors can be seen as methodological in origin, or as motivated by widely discussed analyses of scalar inferences. Such factors allow us to explain some of the variation, but they leave much of it unexplained. In this paper, we explore two new potential factors. One is methodologically motivated, related to the choice of items in previous studies. The second is motivated by theoretical approaches which go beyond the standard Gricean approach to pragmatic effects. In particular, we consider dual route theories which allow for scalar inferences to be explained either using ‘global’ pragmatic derivations, like those set out in standard Gricean theory, or using local adjustments to interpretation. We focus on one such theory, based on the Bayesian Rational Speech Act approach (RSA-LU, Bergen et al., 2016). We show that RSA-LU predicts that a scalar term’s liability to certain kinds of local enrichment will explain some Scalar Diversity. In three experiments, we show that both proposed factors are active in the scalar diversity effect. We conclude with a discussion of the grammatical approach to local effects and show that our results provide better evidence for dual route approaches to scalar effects.