 Philosophers puzzled a great deal over the import of a ‘pragmatic’ ambiguity that wasn’t a speech act ambiguity or perhaps an ambiguity in what a speaker implies by uttering a sentence. Kripke (1977) and Searle (1979: p. 150 fn. 3) claim that pragmatic ambiguity is conceptually confused – either the sentence bears two interpretations and there is a vanilla ambiguity or the sentence used in univocal but the speaker is using it to get across a different or additional piece of information. But the intuition that perhaps pragmatics has a great role to play in interpretation than merely an account of inferences licensed by the needs of conversational coherence has lead philosophers to consider what ambiguity that resides in the interface of semantics and pragmatics might look like (see Recanati (2010).