Page 113 - 6688

113
T he implicatures in [10], that the garden and the child mentioned are not the speaker's,
are calculated on the principle that if the speaker was capable of being more specific (i. e. more
informative, following the quantity maxim), then he or shte would have said 'my garden' and
'my child'.
A number of other generalized conversational implicatures are commonly
communicated on the basis of a sea le of values and are consequently known as scalar
implicatures.

Scalar implicatures
Certain information is always communicated by choosing a word which expresses one
value from a scale of values. This is particu-larly obvious in terms for expressing quantity, as
shown in the scales in [І І], where terms are listed from the highest to the low-est value.
[І І] < all, most, many, some, few>
< always, often, sometimes>
When producing an utterance, a speaker selects the word from the scale which is the
most informative and truthful (quantity and quality) in the circumstances, as in [12. ].
[12] I'm studying linguistics and I've completed some of the required courses.

By choosing 'some' in [12. ], the speaker creates an implicature (+> not all). This is one
scalar implicature of uttering [11]. The basis of scalar implicature is that, when any form in a
scale is asserted, the negative of all forms higher on the scale is implic-ated. The first scale in
[ІІ] had 'all', 'most', and 'many', higher than 'some'. Given the definition of scalar implicature, it
should follow that, in saying 'some of the required courses', the speaker aIso creates other
implicatures (for example, +> not most, +> not many).
If the speaker goes on to describe those linguistics courses as in [13], then we can
identify some more scalar implicatures.
[13] They're sometimes really interesting.
But using 'sometimes' in [13], the speaker communicates, via implicature, the negative
of forms higher on the scale of frequency
(+> not always, +> not often).
There are many scalar implicatures produced by the use of expressions that we may not
immediately consider to be part of any scale. For example, the utterance of [143. ] will be
interpreted as implicating '+> not certain' as a higher value on the scale of ikelihood' and [i4b. ]
'+> not must' on a scale of 'obligation' and
+> not frozen' on a scale of 'coldness'.

[14] a. It's possible that they were delayed.
b. This should be stored in a cool place.
One noticeable feature of scalar implicatures is that when speakers correct themselves
on some detail, as in [15], they typically cancel one of the scalar implicatures.
[15] I got some of this jewelry in Hong Kong—um actually I think I got most of it there.
Іn [15], the speaker initially implicates '+> not most' by saying ‘some', but then corrects herself
by actually asserting 'most'. That final assertion is still likely to be interpreted, however, with a
scalar implicature (+> not all).