Modularity and intuitions in formal semantics: the case of polarity items

Abstract

Linguists often sharply distinguish the different modules that support linguistics competence, e.g., syntax, semantics, pragmatics. However, recent work has identified phenomena in syntax (polarity sensitivity) and pragmatics (implicatures), which seem to rely on semantic properties (monotonicity). We propose to investigate these phenomena and their connections as a window into the modularity of our linguistic knowledge. We conducted a series of experiments to gather the relevant syntactic, semantic and pragmatic judgments within a single paradigm. The comparison between these quantitative data leads us to four main results. (i) Our results support a departure from one element of the classical Gricean approach, thus helping to clarify and settle an empirical debate. This first outcome also confirms the soundness of the methodology, as the results align with standard contemporary accounts of scalar implicature. (ii) We confirm that the formal semantic notion of monotonicity underlies negative polarity item syntactic acceptability, but (iii) our results indicate that the notion needed is perceived monotonicity. We see results (ii) and (iii) as the main contribution of this study: (ii) provides an empirical interpretation and confirmation of one of the insights of the model-theoretic approach to semantics, while (iii) calls for an incremental, cognitive implementation of the current generalizations. (iv) Finally, our results do not indicate that the relationship between negative polarity item acceptability and monotonicity is mediated by pragmatic features related to scalar implicatures: this tells against elegant attempts to unify polarity sensitivity and scalar implicatures (pioneered by Krifka and Chierchia). These results illustrate a new methodology for integrating theoretically rigorous work in formal semantics with an experimentallygrounded cognitively-oriented view of linguistic competence.

Intervention effects in NPI licensing: A quantitative assessment of the scalar implicature explanation

“…This is as it should be, given the known intermediate status of NPIs in NM environments (Rothschild 2006;Chemla et al 2011;Crnič 2014). Second, intervention effects were detected, in the sense that the critical target sentences were judged worse than the DE sentences (t(51) = 6.8, p < 0.001).…”

Predicting moral judgments from causal judgments

“…However, graded scales have been defended and used to collect other types of a priori binary linguistic judgments (e.g., true/false); see in particular Chemla (2009), Chemla and Schlenker (2012), and especially Chemla, Homer, and Rothschild (2011), which offers a correlation analysis of graded judgments for different kinds of judgments as in the current experiment (in that case: inferential judgments and grammaticality judgments). A detailed discussion of the choice between binary and graded judgments can be found in Hansen and Chemla (2013, section 5.2.1, pp.…”

Measuring the cognitive cost of downward monotonicity by controlling for negative polarity

“…Downward monotonicity is a property of linguistic importance (Ladusaw 1980), therefore it is reasonable to assume its reflections can be found with cognitive measures (Geurts & Van Der Slik 2005;Chemla, Homer & Rothschild 2011). However, it is difficult to test whether downward monotonicity contributes to the processing complexity of negative quantifiers, since it is usually confounded with negative polarity.…”