Barner and
Stiller both discuss the concept of “scalar implicature,” an implicature where
a weaker, more ambiguous term is used to prescribe quantity. For example, when
someone says “some of the students went to the mall,” it implies that not all
students went to the mall, even though it could be true logically that all
students went to mall. Both Barner and Stiller compare understanding of scalar
implicature among children and adults. They found that children often have a
harder time computing scalar implicatures, whereas adults are much more adept
in inferring scale. This perhaps is because our ability to understand such
implicatures is refined as our experiential knowledge expands.
Reading about scalar
implicature reminded me of an article that I’d read about the “Black Lives
Matter” movement and the subsequent “All Lives Matter” response. The article named two
primary interpretations of the slogan:
1) black lives matter [as much as others]
2) black lives matter [more than others]
Depending on your background, you might interpret the slogan as one or the other. However, the point is that one who
interprets the slogan as the latter would feel more inclined to respond with the statement “all
lives matter” because they feel that "black lives matter" discounts the lives of other races. However, they miss the silent scalar implicature—that “Black
Lives Matter” is more additive (implying that black lives matter just as much
as others) rather than exhaustive (implying that black lives matter more than others)—instead reciprocating with "All Lives Matter." Unfortunately, this statement then comes off as dismissive to supporters of "Black Lives Matter," culminating with misunderstanding on both sides.
I really like the point you've made here because when I first heard about the "Black Lives Matter" movement, I took at as your first description (black lives matter as much as others) however, you make up a good point about how different interpretations of this statement can lead to a whole new meaning. It was only until after someone had mentioned the idea of "All lives matter" that I understood it as the second meaning. The silent scalar implicature is something that is dependent on your background.
ReplyDelete(Posted on behalf of Hope Schroeder)
ReplyDeleteHi Catherine,
I really appreciate the way you drew such a poignant example of the meaning of logical operators like some and all beyond their literal definitions. I saw a good explainer on Black Lives Matter trying to show the difference between All Lives Matter and Black Lives Matter… I can’t find it exactly, but it was something like this.
Because of the systemic injustices posed against black people in this country based on race through the police violence we have seen over the past few years and beyond, it is important that we affirm that black lives matter.
For people with shared context, the subtext is obvious without that whole preamble, but for opponents, it’s clearly not. It makes me think about how short catchphrases can become imbued with meaning in different ways by different groups.
This is a really great application of scalar implicature not just in the context of children but about a super relevant social issue, one with an incredibly linguistic-heavy controversy. I personally have found myself struggling to explain to people the additive nature of the name of the movement. It makes me wonder sometimes if, if the movement had a different name without this scalar issue (though i struggle to come up with one as poignant and direct), it would receive less controversy, as people would not be able to contest it on grounds of linguistic exclusion? Or would that also potentially cause a weakening of the movement's power through it's firm and unconventional name? Is it the very fact of the potentially vague implicature that makes is so inflammatory and thus perhaps more radical or effective/ineffective?
ReplyDeleteWhat a way to bring it into reality. I think, especially now, politics and social movements will be the best way to find examples of speech nuance and linguistic maneuvering. Tying things back to the paper I wonder how the children would interpret these. Obviously they lack the social cognizance or nuance to draw a distinction of Black Lives Matter versus All Lives Matters. I think this would be a great way to see the primitiveness of the implicature i.e. how natural it is. For something that has caused great backlash in both directions, was it all avoidable? Did someone just miss an implicature? Or did someone use one dangerously close to ambiguity? It'd be interesting to see how the language used on behalf of a social movement correlates to its lifeline in success or failure.
ReplyDeleteEchoing fellow commenters, I really appreciate how you found a way to make such academic pieces so relevant to social issues today. Going off Alec’s comment, I think it would be incredibly interesting to see how young kids would interpret these sentences, and possibly compare to kids of middle school age and then high school. Not only would I love to see the development of scalar implicature as kids grow, but in this particular case it would be cool to see if interpretations change as they learn more about the history of America. Similarly, one could compare interpretation of both statements around people who know absolutely nothing about American history and racism. I wonder if people without knowledge of the disenfranchisement of black people in America would be more likely to interpret Black Lives Matter as implying “more than others” due to an unawareness of contextual oppression.
ReplyDeleteWhat a great post! I was actually talking about BLM earlier today with someone. I really liked Alex's comment here that BLM implying "more than others" could be due to an unawareness of contextual oppression. It's shocking to me that anyone could interpret the slogan as "more than others," but as I've learned from this election, I'm guilty of living in a bubble where my echo chambers are sealed off. I was listening to a podcast the other day (called 2 Dope Queens), where a comedian was talking about opposition for the movement. He commented how he saw a "white lives matter" post and joked about how people are just jealous of a "dope name" for a movement where they're not an immediate beneficiary. I personally think people are offended by the name out of self-interest. Anyway, it's been tough to convince some people over the past few days why BLM is so important. Another issue related to quantity is that some people look at raw numbers of those that are killed by the police (which shows a higher num of whites killed), without adjusting for population. Sigh.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! It's interesting to see how the expression "All lives matter" is interpreted by individuals who support the "Black lives matter" movement. Even though "All lives matter" covers linguistically "Black lives matter", we have to understand that there is still an implication being made in a similar "alternative-negating" fashion. The alternative is the previously established "Black lives matter" and so to choose "All lives matter" contests the legitimacy of the first.
ReplyDeleteYour rational for why people might be opposed to "Black lives matter" is also interesting. I had always thought that it wasn't that people thought the expression was exclusive, but that they thought it wasn't necessary to say.