Explicature versus default meaning: A response to Alessandro Capone's Default Semantics and the architecture of the mind

Alessandro Capone (2011) makes an attempt to provide a unified picture for Relevance Theory and Default Semantics by supporting the idea of the division of labor between these two approaches; that is, both are needed and are complementary subparts of a superordinate theory. We argue against Capone's account by recapitulating the two concepts of explicatures and default meanings, and maintain that Relevance Theory and Default Semantics are both derived from reconceptualizing Grice's generalized conversational implicature. These theories provide different approaches to such additional meanings of uttered sentences by holding different theoretical positions. Therefore, it is hard to draw a picture of them as unified.