{"id":{"repo_id":"calgary","oai_identifier":"oai:ucalgary.scholaris.ca:1880/122234"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/calgary/oai:ucalgary.scholaris.ca:1880/122234","repository":{"repo_id":"calgary","name":"University of Calgary","base_url":"https://ucalgary.scholaris.ca/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Do you get what I mean? Contrastive Inference and Comprehension in Children","abstract":"Children by five years of age are able to form and comprehend sentences in almost adult like ways, however what we mean often requires enrichment through what isn’t said. These pragmatic effects are a result of contrastive inference and exhaustification processes that are reliant on whether or not children can reliably access propositional alternatives. Scalar implicatures, adjectives, and it-clefts show evidence that accessibility of alternatives facilitates children’s success in these cases. However, it is unclear how 4 to 7 year old children will utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification when the context is ambiguous as to whether one should generate pragmatic enrichment. We found that children appear, in some cases, to be extra pragmatic compared to adults. This shows that children, when they are given access to alternatives are pragmatically competent and utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification even when the context is ambiguous. This research highlights the importance of informative contexts and contributes to the discussion around context-dependency and implicatures.","abstract_html":"Children by five years of age are able to form and comprehend sentences in almost adult like ways, however what we mean often requires enrichment through what isn’t said. These pragmatic effects are a result of contrastive inference and exhaustification processes that are reliant on whether or not children can reliably access propositional alternatives. Scalar implicatures, adjectives, and it-clefts show evidence that accessibility of alternatives facilitates children’s success in these cases. However, it is unclear how 4 to 7 year old children will utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification when the context is ambiguous as to whether one should generate pragmatic enrichment. We found that children appear, in some cases, to be extra pragmatic compared to adults. This shows that children, when they are given access to alternatives are pragmatically competent and utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification even when the context is ambiguous. This research highlights the importance of informative contexts and contributes to the discussion around context-dependency and implicatures.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Iwanchuk, Cheryl"],"institution":"Arts","degree_name":"Master of Arts (MA)","degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":"Linguistics","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Skordos, Dimitrios"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":["Skordos, Dimitrios","Liebesman, David","Storoshenko, Dennis"],"year":2025,"date_issued":"2025-07-04","date_published":"2025-07-04","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:30:44Z","subjects":["Contrastive Inference","Exhaustivity","Acquisition","Implicature","Ad Hoc Scales"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Unless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.doi","label":"DOI","values":["https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/49826"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/49826","href":"https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/49826","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/1880/122234","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Skordos, Dimitrios"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Skordos, Dimitrios","Liebesman, David","Storoshenko, Dennis"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Iwanchuk, Cheryl"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2025-11"]},{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2025-07-15T16:19:01Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2025-07-15T16:19:01Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2025-07-04"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["master thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Linguistics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Calgary"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Contrastive Inference","Exhaustivity","Acquisition","Implicature","Ad Hoc Scales"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Unless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.doi","label":"DOI","values":["https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/49826"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/1880/122234"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Children by five years of age are able to form and comprehend sentences in almost adult like ways, however what we mean often requires enrichment through what isn’t said. These pragmatic effects are a result of contrastive inference and exhaustification processes that are reliant on whether or not children can reliably access propositional alternatives. Scalar implicatures, adjectives, and it-clefts show evidence that accessibility of alternatives facilitates children’s success in these cases. However, it is unclear how 4 to 7 year old children will utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification when the context is ambiguous as to whether one should generate pragmatic enrichment. We found that children appear, in some cases, to be extra pragmatic compared to adults. This shows that children, when they are given access to alternatives are pragmatically competent and utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification even when the context is ambiguous. This research highlights the importance of informative contexts and contributes to the discussion around context-dependency and implicatures."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Do you get what I mean? Contrastive Inference and Comprehension in Children"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Skordos, Dimitrios"],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Skordos, Dimitrios","Liebesman, David","Storoshenko, Dennis"],"dc:creator":["Iwanchuk, Cheryl"],"dc:date":["2025-11"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2025-07-15T16:19:01Z"],"dc:date.available":["2025-07-15T16:19:01Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2025-07-04"],"dc:description.abstract":["Children by five years of age are able to form and comprehend sentences in almost adult like ways, however what we mean often requires enrichment through what isn’t said. These pragmatic effects are a result of contrastive inference and exhaustification processes that are reliant on whether or not children can reliably access propositional alternatives. Scalar implicatures, adjectives, and it-clefts show evidence that accessibility of alternatives facilitates children’s success in these cases. However, it is unclear how 4 to 7 year old children will utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification when the context is ambiguous as to whether one should generate pragmatic enrichment. We found that children appear, in some cases, to be extra pragmatic compared to adults. This shows that children, when they are given access to alternatives are pragmatically competent and utilize contrastive inference and exhaustification even when the context is ambiguous. This research highlights the importance of informative contexts and contributes to the discussion around context-dependency and implicatures."],"dc:identifier.doi":["https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/49826"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/1880/122234"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:rights":["Unless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission."],"dc:subject":["Contrastive Inference","Exhaustivity","Acquisition","Implicature","Ad Hoc Scales"],"dc:title":["Do you get what I mean? Contrastive Inference and Comprehension in Children"],"dc:type":["master thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Linguistics"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (MA)"],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Calgary"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:30:44Z"}