LINGUIST List 33.147

Tue Jan 18 2022

Confs: Philosophy of Language, Pragmatics, Psycholinguistics, Semantics/Germany

Editor for this issue: Everett Green <>

Date: 11-Jan-2022
From: Nicole Gotzner <>
Subject: XPRAG Wine Gatherings
E-mail this message to a friend

XPRAG Wine Gatherings
Short Title: XPRAG-Wine

Date: 20-Jan-2022 - 20-Jan-2022
Location: Potsdam (Zoom), Germany
Contact: Nicole Gotzner
Contact Email: < click here to access email >
Meeting URL:

Linguistic Field(s): Philosophy of Language; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics

Meeting Description:

The next XPRAG Wine Gathering is going back to its roots. After a year, we return to one of our founding fathers, Richard Breheny from UCL. On 20th January Richard will present a talk titled ''The money or the slime: Exclusivity implicatures in semi-cooperative contexts and their consequences for pragmatic accounts'', based on joint work with Paul Marty, Yasu Sudo and Jacopo Romoli. Join us in drinking a Grange Hermitage from South Australia or a cold beer (but make sure to avoid slime!).

Date: 20th January, 8.15 p.m. (CET)
Speakers: Richard Breheny (UCL)
Talk: The money or the slime: Exclusivity implicatures in semi-cooperative contexts and their consequences for pragmatic accounts
Hosts: Nicole Gotzner (University of Potsdam) and Ira Noveck (Université de Paris, CNRS)
Drink menu: Grange Hermitage from South Australia or beer (but no slime!)
Zoom link:
Meeting ID: 876 5060 2862
Passcode: 202020
YouTube channel:

Two widely discussed implications of typical uses of disjunction (‘A or B’) are ignorance implicatures (the speaker does not know if A is true or not, likewise B) and exclusivity implicatures (not [A and B]). According to standard pragmatic accounts (see Sauerland, 2004), both implications result from reasoning about a co-operative speaker who conforms to expectations about the utility of their utterance. Fox (2014) discusses a ‘guess the box’ game-show context in which a host (who is known to know the facts) provides a hint as to which box some prize money is in, ‘There is money in box A or B’. Fox argues that, in such contexts, the host is not normally co-operative, no ignorance implicatures arise, and yet an exclusivity implications do arise. This is taken as evidence against standard pragmatic accounts and for Fox’s favoured grammatical account of scalar implicatures. Here we develop an experimental paradigm due to Agyemang (2020) to test an alternative explanation of the game-show implications by controlling for features of the context that may give rise to exclusivity independently of standard pragmatic reasoning. Our results show that exclusivity implications are equally robust in both contexts. We take these results as motivation to re-think the standard pragmatic account of the reasoning associated with disjunction and show how a more nuanced description allows for exclusivity to arise in such contexts. Finally, we discuss how both this pragmatic account and Fox’s favoured grammatical account leave open a question as to why language users favour exclusivity when the situational evidence for that implication is quite equivocal.

References Agyemang, C. (2020). Scalar implicatures under uncertainty. ms Carleton U. • Fox, D. (2014). Cancelling the Maxim of Quantity: Another challenge for a Gricean theory of Scalar Implicatures Semantics & Pragmatics • Sauerland, U. (2004). Scalar implicatures in complex sentences.L&P 27: 367–391.

Page Updated: 18-Jan-2022