Documentation

Linglib.Theories.Pragmatics.NeoGricean.Evaluativity

Polarity of an adjective: positive (unmarked) vs negative (marked).

From @cite{bierwisch-1989}, @cite{kennedy-2007}:

  • Positive-polar (tall, happy, expensive): unmarked, default
  • Negative-polar (short, unhappy, cheap): marked, requires more justification

Markedness is reflected in:

  • Morphological complexity (happy → un-happy)
  • Distributional restrictions ("How tall?" is neutral, "How short?" presupposes)
  • Processing cost (marked forms are costlier)
Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      Is this polarity marked?

      Negative-polar adjectives are marked (require more contextual support).

      Equations
      Instances For

        Production cost associated with polarity.

        Marked forms cost more to produce, licensing manner implicatures. This follows @cite{horn-1984}'s Division of Pragmatic Labor.

        Equations
        Instances For

          Polar variance: do the two antonyms have different truth conditions in this construction?

          This is the key property that determines whether manner implicature applies:

          • Polar-VARIANT: "taller than" ≠ "shorter than" (different truth conditions)
          • Polar-INVARIANT: "as tall as" = "as short as" (same truth conditions!)

          When a construction is polar-invariant, the marked form is semantically equivalent to the unmarked form, so using it signals something pragmatically.

          Instances For
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Does manner implicature apply to this construction?

              Manner implicature requires polar INVARIANCE:

              • If the two antonyms have the same meaning, using the costlier marked form signals something extra (evaluativity)
              • If they have different meanings, no pragmatic competition occurs
              Equations
              Instances For

                Types of implicature that can derive evaluativity.

                Following @cite{rett-2015} Chapter 4-5:

                • Quantity (Q): Avoid uninformative utterances → strengthen to evaluative
                • Manner (R): Use of costly form signals marked meaning → evaluativity

                These correspond to Horn's Q-principle (say enough) and R-principle (don't say more than needed, modulated by form cost).

                Instances For
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For

                    Derivation of evaluativity for a construction + polarity combination.

                    Records:

                    • Which implicature type applies
                    • Whether evaluativity is predicted
                    • The mechanism (Q vs R)
                    Instances For
                      Equations
                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                      Instances For

                        Derive evaluativity for a construction + polarity.

                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For

                          All predictions for positive-polar adjectives.

                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For

                            All predictions for negative-polar adjectives.

                            Equations
                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                            Instances For

                              Summary table matching Rett's Table 5.1.

                              Positive-polarNegative-polar
                              Positiveevaluative (Q)evaluative (Q)
                              Comparativenon-evalnon-eval
                              Equativenon-evalevaluative (R)
                              Measure Phrasenon-eval(ungrammatical)
                              Degree Questionnon-evalevaluative (R)
                              Equations
                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                              Instances For

                                Q-implicature derivation for positive constructions.

                                Standard Recipe applied to "John is tall":

                                1. Speaker said "John is tall"
                                2. Alternative: "John is tall to degree d" (for any d)
                                3. Without evaluativity, this is true for any d - UNINFORMATIVE
                                4. Listener strengthens: John's height exceeds contextual standard

                                This is the same mechanism as scalar implicatures, applied to threshold inference.

                                Instances For
                                  Equations
                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                  Instances For

                                    Derive Q-implicature for positive constructions.

                                    Equations
                                    Instances For

                                      R-implicature derivation for equatives/questions.

                                      Division of Pragmatic Labor applied to "How short is John?":

                                      1. Speaker used marked form "short" (cost = 2)
                                      2. Unmarked alternative "tall" available (cost = 1)
                                      3. Same truth conditions (polar-invariant)
                                      4. Using costly form must signal something extra
                                      5. That something = evaluativity (presupposes shortness)
                                      Instances For
                                        Equations
                                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                        Instances For

                                          Derive R-implicature for equatives/questions.

                                          Equations
                                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                          Instances For

                                            How this Neo-Gricean account relates to RSA.

                                            Both derive evaluativity pragmatically, but via different mechanisms:

                                            Neo-Gricean (this module):

                                            • Q-implicature: scalar reasoning about informativity
                                            • R-implicature: cost-based manner reasoning

                                            RSA:

                                            • Joint inference over degree and threshold
                                            • Listener models speaker's utility-maximizing behavior
                                            • Cost can be built into speaker utility

                                            Key difference: RSA derives thresholds via joint inference, while Neo-Gricean stipulates the mechanism (Q vs R).

                                            The predictions are largely the same, but:

                                            • RSA makes graded predictions (probability distributions)
                                            • Neo-Gricean makes categorical predictions (evaluative or not)
                                            Equations
                                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                            Instances For

                                              The Marked Meaning Principle (MMP) derivation record.

                                              From @cite{rett-2015} Chapter 5, following @cite{horn-1984}:

                                              The MMP states that using a marked form when an unmarked equivalent exists signals that the speaker intends the marked meaning.

                                              For evaluativity: using "as short as" instead of "as tall as" in an equative signals that the speaker presupposes shortness.

                                              Instances For
                                                Equations
                                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                Instances For

                                                  Apply the Marked Meaning Principle.

                                                  MMP applies when:

                                                  1. The form is marked (has higher cost)
                                                  2. The construction is polar-invariant (alternatives have same TCs)
                                                  3. An unmarked alternative exists

                                                  When MMP applies, using the marked form implicates evaluativity.

                                                  Equations
                                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                  Instances For

                                                    Extended evaluativity derivation with lexicon grounding.

                                                    This structure records:

                                                    1. The adjective and its morphological properties
                                                    2. Markedness determination via objective criteria
                                                    3. M-alternative generation
                                                    4. Q/R implicature derivation
                                                    5. Final evaluativity prediction
                                                    Instances For
                                                      Equations
                                                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                      Instances For

                                                        Derive evaluativity with full lexicon grounding.

                                                        This is the main entry point for the Neo-Gricean evaluativity derivation. It:

                                                        1. Looks up morphological properties of the adjective
                                                        2. Computes markedness from objective criteria
                                                        3. Generates M-alternatives for polar-invariant constructions
                                                        4. Applies Q-implicature (positive) or MMP (equative/question)
                                                        5. Returns a fully grounded derivation
                                                        Equations
                                                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                        Instances For

                                                          Degree tautology analysis for positive constructions.

                                                          Following @cite{rett-2015} Chapter 3:

                                                          Without evaluativity, "John is tall" is a degree tautology:

                                                          • It asserts that John has SOME degree of height
                                                          • This is trivially true for any entity with height

                                                          Q-implicature resolves this by strengthening to evaluative reading:

                                                          • "John is tall" → John's height exceeds the contextual standard

                                                          This explains why positive constructions are evaluative for BOTH polarities.

                                                          Instances For
                                                            Equations
                                                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                            Instances For

                                                              Analyze degree tautology for a construction.

                                                              Equations
                                                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                              Instances For

                                                                @cite{rett-2015} Core Predictions #

                                                                @cite{rett-2015} @cite{lassiter-goodman-2017}

                                                                These theorems formalize the key empirical predictions from Rett's account:

                                                                1. Evaluativity distribution: Which constructions are evaluative?
                                                                2. Asymmetry pattern: When do we see polarity asymmetry?
                                                                3. Mechanism attribution: Q-implicature vs MMP?
                                                                4. Morphological grounding: How does markedness determine asymmetry?

                                                                Q-implicature mechanism: Positive constructions use Quantity.

                                                                Q-implicature resolves the "degree tautology" of positive constructions. Without evaluativity, "John is tall" is trivially true for anyone with height.