I'd say all languages work like that, not just English. Your phrasing "too ambiguous" is a little off to me. Ambiguity (in the sense of utterances having multiple possible interpretations) is the norm in natural language, and it combines with our ability to effortlessly pick the intended one based on context to make natural language work.
Even sentences that on their face are strictly propositional will, in actual situated language use, have implied meanings (a pragmatic level). The canonical example is where one person says "It's cold" (at it's core a statement of fact), after which another person closes a window, or hands them a jacket, or follows with "Let's go home, then". If you want to give an account of natural language meaning that's even remotely complete, you cannot stop at what's in the sentence at the surface, you absolutely have to look at why it's being said.
Indeed, if you think of an actual situation where someone would say "do you want to eat pizza or pasta?", I think you'd find that it does, in fact, imply that the two are exclusive in that context - say if you're at a restaurant where they only expect you to order one main course. But this is not a problem at all, it's just how language works.
(And personally, on the subject of logic and language, I'd even go as far as to say that logic is based on natural language rather than the other way around, but I think that might be tough sell to the mathematically minded.)
>> Indeed, if you think of an actual situation where someone would say "do you want to eat pizza or pasta?", I think you'd find that it does, in fact, imply that the two are exclusive in that context
It was actually this specific question that made it clear to me that this is not the case.
In order to narrow down our takeout options, the girlfriend and I regularly ask questions like, "Do you want pizza or pasta?" meaning "Are any or all of these meal options acceptable to you?" (at which point the conversation continues with maybe us listing a few restaurants which offering one or both options.) This is the same exact phrase, but from context it is inclusive or.
>> - say if you're at a restaurant where they only expect you to order one main course.
Indeed, if the question was something like "Would you like soup or salad?" where, from context, the choice is binary and exclusive.
Even sentences that on their face are strictly propositional will, in actual situated language use, have implied meanings (a pragmatic level). The canonical example is where one person says "It's cold" (at it's core a statement of fact), after which another person closes a window, or hands them a jacket, or follows with "Let's go home, then". If you want to give an account of natural language meaning that's even remotely complete, you cannot stop at what's in the sentence at the surface, you absolutely have to look at why it's being said.
Indeed, if you think of an actual situation where someone would say "do you want to eat pizza or pasta?", I think you'd find that it does, in fact, imply that the two are exclusive in that context - say if you're at a restaurant where they only expect you to order one main course. But this is not a problem at all, it's just how language works.
(And personally, on the subject of logic and language, I'd even go as far as to say that logic is based on natural language rather than the other way around, but I think that might be tough sell to the mathematically minded.)