 To account for the intuition that (4) is interpreted in a non-stereotypical way, Blutner (2000) introduces a weaker notion of optimality that also takes into account a notion of blocking: one form’s pragmatically assigned meaning can take away, so to speak, that meaning from another, less favorable form. In the present case, the stereotypical interpretation is intuitively blocked for the cumbersome form (4) by the cheaper alternative expression (3). Formally, a form-interpretation pair \(\langle f,i\rangle\) is weakly  optimal[3]  iff there is neither a strongly optimal \(\langle f,i'\rangle\) such that \(\langle f,i'\rangle \gt \langle f,i\rangle\) nor a strongly optimal \(\langle f',i\rangle\) such that \(\langle f',i\rangle \gt \langle f,i\rangle\). All form-interpretation pairs that are strongly optimal are also weakly optimal. However, a pair that is not strongly optimal like \(\langle\)(4),\(i_{\neg st}\rangle\) can still be weakly optimal: since neither \(\langle\)(4),\(i_{st}\rangle\) nor \(\langle\)(3),\(i_{\neg st}\rangle\) is strongly optimal, there is no objection for \(\langle\)(4),\(i_{\neg st}\rangle\) to be a (weakly) optimal pair. As a result, the marked (4) will get the non-stereotypical interpretation. In general, application of the above definition of weak optimality can be difficult, but Jäger (2002) gives a concise algorithm for computing weakly optimal form-interpretation pairs.