On the Meaning of or: Inclusivity vs. Alternativity

초록

The meaning of or has been considered the same as the logical connective ∨ (inclusive disjunction), which means that at least one disjunct is true. Ariel and Mauri (2018, 2019), examining the Santa Barbara Corpus, argue that inclusivity is too strong because the speaker may commit to none of the alternatives and too weak because she can commit to all alternatives. Instead, they suggest that the core meaning of or is ‘alternativity’ on some level (the propositional level or a non-propositional level), which is procedural, non-truth-conditional and conventionally implicated. They classify or constructions according to the types of their ‘explicatures’: Raised options, Higher-Level Category, Conjunctive, Narrowed, Choice, and Exhaustive readings. In this paper, I argue for the standard account of or, that is, or means inclusivity. Although some alternatives are distinct on a non-propositional level, the difference may contribute to the truth-conditional content through pragmatic enrichment. I deal with metalinguistic disjunction to show the process of pragmatic enrichment. In addition, I point out that some of Ariel and Mauri’s ‘explicatures’ of or constructions are better analyzed as pragmatically derived implicatures.

키워드