Abstract
While most research on scalar implicature has focused on the lexical scale “some” vs “all,” here we investigated an understudied scale formed by two syntactic constructions: categorizations (e.g., “Wilma is a nurse”) and comparisons (“Wilma is like a nurse”). An experimental study by Rubio-Fernandez et al. (2017) showed high rates of logical responses to superordinate comparisons, even though they are underinformative when interpreted pragmatically (e.g., “A robin is like a bird” implies that a robin is not a bird). Based on recent studies on enrichment priming, we predicted that including “some” and “all” statements (which typically elicit high rates of pragmatic responses) in sentence verification and sentence evaluation tasks would introduce an informativity bias, increasing pragmatic responses to superordinate comparisons.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 569-582 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Early online date | 27 Sept 2021 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2022 |
Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)
- categorization
- comparison
- scalar implicature
- scalarity
- sentence verification
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Some sentences prime pragmatic reasoning in the verification and evaluation of comparisons'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver