Using self-paced reading, the present study compared native English and adult L1-Korean–L2-English speakers’ processing behaviors during online comprehension of underinformative scalar sentences and non-scalar sentences like Some/All elephants have trunks and ears. Results indicate that native speakers showed online sensitivity (i.e. slower reading) to underinformative scalar sentences relative to non-scalar sentences, but second language (L2) speakers did not. These results are interpreted in support of the Relevance Theory claim that scalar implicature generation is modulated by contextual and individual factors, in particular by the language condition, that is, whether sentences are presented in L1-English versus L2-English.
AhnH (2021) From interlanguage grammar to target grammar in L2 processing of definiteness as uniqueness. Second Language Research37: 91–119.
2.
AndreouGKarapetsasA (2004) Verbal abilities in low and highly proficient bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research33: 357–64.
3.
AugurzkyPFrankeMUlrichR (2019) Gricean expectations in online sentence comprehension: An ERP study on the processing of scalar inferences. Cognitive Science43: e12776.
4.
BialystokECraikFIGreenDWGollanTH (2009) Bilingual minds. Psychological Science in the Public Interest10: 89–129.
5.
BottLNoveckIA (2004) Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language51: 437–57.
6.
BrehenyRFergusonHKatsosN (2013) Taking the epistemic step: Toward a model of on-line access to conversational implicatures. Cognition126: 423–40.
7.
BrehenyRKatsosNWilliamsJ (2006) Are generalized scalar implicatures generated by default? An on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences. Cognition100: 434–63.
8.
ClahsenHFelserC (2006) Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics27: 3–42.
9.
Clifton Jr. C (2013)Situational context affects definiteness preferences: Accommodation of presuppositions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition39: 487–501.
DegenJTanenhausM (2019) Constraint-based pragmatic processing. In: CumminsCKatsosN (eds) The Oxford handbook of experimental semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 21–38.
12.
DupuyLStatevaPAndreettaS, et al. (2018) Pragmatic abilities in bilinguals: The case of scalar implicatures. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism9: 314–40.
13.
FedermeierK (2007) Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology44: 491–505.
14.
FeeneyAScraftonSDuckworthA, et al. (2004) The story of some: Everyday pragmatic inference by children and adults. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale58: 121–32.
15.
FerreiraFBaileyKGFerraroV (2002) Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science11: 11–15.
16.
FodorJA (1983) The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
ForsterK (1979) Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. In: CooperWEWalkerECT (eds) Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 27–85.
18.
FortuneTW (2012) What the research says about immersion. In: Chinese language learning in the early grades: A handbook of resources and best practices for Mandarin immersion. The Asia Society, pp. 9–13. Available at: http://asiasociety.org/files/chinese-earlylanguage.pdf (accessed October 2022).
19.
FrazierLCarlsonKCliftonC (2006) Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences10: 244–49.
20.
GazdarG (1979) Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition and logical form. New York: Academic Press.
21.
GriceP (1975) Logic and conversation. In: ColePMorganJL (eds) Studies in syntax: Volume 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41–58.
22.
GrodnerDKleinNCarbaryK, et al. (2010) Some and possibly all scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate prgmatic enrichment. Cognition116: 42–55.
23.
HoltgravesTKrausB (2018) Processing scalar implicatures in conversational contexts: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics46: 93–108.
24.
HornL (2004) Implicature. In: HornLWardG (eds) The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 3–28.
25.
HuangYTSnedekerJ (2009) Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics–pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology58: 376–415.
26.
HuangYTSnedekerJ (2011) Logic and conversation revisited: Evidence for a division between semantic and pragmatic content in real-time language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes26: 1161–72.
27.
HuntLPolitzer-AhlesSGibsonL, et al. (2013) Pragmatic inferences modulate N400 during sentence comprehension: Evidence from picture–sentence verification. Neuroscience Letters534: 246–51.
28.
IoninTChoiSHLiuQ (2022) What transfers (or doesn’t) in the second language acquisition of English articles by learners from article-less native languages?Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism12: 133−62.
29.
JuffsA (2001) Psycholinguistically oriented second language research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics21: 207–20.
30.
JustMAWoolleyJCarpenterP (1982) Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology111: 228–38.
31.
KatsosN (2003) An experimental study on pragmatic inferences: Processing implicatures and presuppositions. Unpublished manuscript, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
32.
LealT (2018) Data analysis and sampling. In: GudmestadAEdmondsA (eds) Critical reflections on data in second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 63–88.
33.
LevinsonS (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
MazzaggioGPanizzaDSurianL (2021) On the interpretation of scalar implicatures in first and second language. Journal of Pragmatics171: 62–75.
35.
NieuwlandMDitmanTKuperbergG (2010) On the incrementality of pragmatic processing: An ERP investigation of informativeness and pragmatic abilities. Journal of Memory and Language63: 324–46.
36.
NoveckI (2001) When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition78: 165–88.
37.
NoveckIAReboulA (2008) Experimental pragmatics: A Gricean turn in the study of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences12: 425–31.
NoveckISperberD (2007) The why and how of experimental pragmatics: The case of ‘scalar inferences’. In: Burton-RobertsN (ed.) Advances in pragmatics. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 184–212.
40.
PankratzEVan TielB (2021) The role of relevance for scalar diversity: A usage-based approach. Language and Cognition13: 562–94.
41.
Politzer-AhlesSFiorentinoRJiangX, et al. (2013) Distinct neural correlates for pragmatic and semantic meaning processing: An event-related potential investigation of scalar implicature processing using picture–sentence verification. Brain Research1490: 134–52.
42.
RobertsLFelserC (2011) Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics32: 299–331.
43.
SanfordAJGarrodSC (1998) The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes26: 159–90.
44.
SanfordAJSturtP (2002) Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences6: 382–86.
45.
SlabakovaR (2010) Scalar implicatures in second language acquisition. Lingua120: 2444–62.
46.
SoraceA (2011) Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism1: 1–33.
47.
SperberDWilsonD (1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
48.
SunCBrehenyR (2020) Another look at the online processing of scalar inferences: An investigation of conflicting findings from visual-world eye-tracking studies. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience35: 949–79.
49.
Van BerkumJ (2009) The neuropragmatics of ‘simple’ utterance comprehension: An ERP review. In: SauerlandUYatsushiroK (eds) Semantics and pragmatics: From experiment to theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 276–316.
50.
Van TielBVan MiltenburgEZevakhinaNGeurtsB (2016) Scalar diversity. Journal of Semantics33: 137–75.
51.
WinterB (2020). Statistics for linguists: An introduction using R. Routledge.
