Presuppositions and scope

Journal of Philosophy 104 (2):71-106 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper discusses the apparent scope ambiguities between definite descriptions and modal operators. I argue that we need the theory of presupposition to explain why these ambiguities are not always present, and that once that theory is in hand, Kripke’s modal argument loses much of its force.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,347

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
262 (#78,434)

6 months
33 (#103,869)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Rothschild
University College London

Citations of this work

Names Are Predicates.Delia Graff Fara - 2015 - Philosophical Review 124 (1):59-117.
Type-Ambiguous Names.Anders J. Schoubye - 2017 - Mind 126 (503):715-767.
Theories of meaning (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).Jeff Speaks - 2010 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 34 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Naming and Necessity.S. Kripke - 1972 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (4):665-666.
Reference and definite descriptions.Keith S. Donnellan - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.
Common ground.Robert Stalnaker - 2002 - Linguistics and Philosophy 25 (5-6):701-721.
Pragmatic Presuppositions.Robert Stalnaker - 1974 - In Context and Content. Oxford University Press. pp. 47--62.
Reference and proper names.Tyler Burge - 1973 - Journal of Philosophy 70 (14):425-439.

View all 10 references / Add more references