Scalar Implicatures: Pragmatic Inferences or Grammar?

This talk discusses the nature of different kinds of scales and controversies over issues on the generation of scalar implicatures, particularly those in complex sentences involving disjunction and another operator in its scope, and so on. The pragmatic position based on Gricean reasoning in opposition to the grammatical position based on alternative semantics and LF syntax employing the exhaustivity (Exh) operator will be examined. The context-driven view and the default view largely still within the pragmatic position will also be discussed. In doing so, the talk will offer my position that scalar implicatures are motivated by Gricean pragmatic reasoning but that they are deeply and crucially rooted in the grammatical devices of Contrastive Topic (CT), overt or covert. CT requires PA (pero/aber) conjunction, i.e. ‘concessive But’ and that’s why scalar implicatures begin with but and its equivalents cross-linguistically. The CT operator rather than the exhaustivity (Exh) operator must be represented to be related to the previous discourse and the forward concessive conjunction.