Researchers in reasoning have usually relied on models or inferential schemas in order to characterize logical terms such as or, and, not, if� and some.� But much recent experimental work that benefits from pragmatics ultimately addresses how such terms are initially represented and eventually interpreted. �In order to do so, I will look at scalar enrichment, a classic example of what Grice once referred to as a generalized conversational implicature (e.g. the utterance �Some students earn their degree in four years� could be taken to mean that not all do).� Overall, I aim to show how the cognitive sciences in general, and the fields of reasoning and psycholinguistics in particular, can be enriched when pragmatic theorizing is given its due as a motor of experimental investigation.
Chevallier, C.� Noveck, I. A., Nazir, T., Sperber, D., Bott, L. & Lanzetti, V. (in press) Making Or exclusive.� QJEP.
Noveck, I.A., Guelminger, R., Georgieff, N. & Labruyere, N. (2007).� What autism can tell us about Every�not sentences. Journal of Semantics, 24,(1), 73-90.
Prado, J. & Noveck, I.A. (2007). Overcoming a perceptual bias : A parametric fMRI study.� Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(4), 642-657.