Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. On the difference between the ‘In’ and ‘According to’ operators.Merel Semeijn - 2023 - Linguistics and Philosophy 47 (2):239-264.
    Semanticists and philosophers of fiction that formulate analyses of reports on the content of media—or ‘contensive statements’—of the form ‘In/According to _s_, \(\phi \) ’, usually treat the ‘In _s_’-operator (_In_) and the ‘According to _s_’-operator (_Acc_) on a par. I argue that _In_ and _Acc_ require separate semantic analyses based on three clusters of linguistic observations: (1) preferences for _In_ or _Acc_ in contensive statements about fictional or non-fictional media, (2) preferences for _In_ or _Acc_ in contensive statements about (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Weak speech reports.Martín Abreu Zavaleta - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (8):2139-2166.
    Indirect speech reports can be true even if they attribute to the speaker the saying of something weaker than what she in fact expressed, yet not all weakenings of what the speaker expressed yield true reports. For example, if Anna utters ‘Bob and Carla passed the exam’, we can accurately report her as having said that Carla passed the exam, but we can not accurately report her as having said that either it rains or it does not, or that either (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Gesture projection and cosuppositions.Philippe Schlenker - 2018 - Linguistics and Philosophy 41 (3):295-365.
    In dynamic theories of presupposition, a trigger pp′ with presupposition p and at-issue component p′ comes with a requirement that p should be entailed by the local context of pp′. We argue that some co-speech gestures should be analyzed within a presuppositional framework, but with a twist: an expression p co-occurring with a co-speech gesture G with content g comes with the requirement that the local context of p should guarantee that p entails g; we call such assertion-dependent presuppositions ‘cosuppositions’. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Why indefinites can escape scope islands.Edgar Onea - 2015 - Linguistics and Philosophy 38 (3):237-267.
    One of the big questions about indefinites is why they can escape scope islands. In the recent approach of Brasoveanu and Farkas :1–55, 2011) scopal relations with syntactically dominating quantifiers are hard wired into the semantic definition of the existential quantifier, which immediately explains why the semantic scope of indefinites may exceed their syntactic scope. In this paper, I argue for the revival of an alternative approach which places the explanatory burden on the idea that indefinites are essentially referential expressions, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A (contingent) content–parthood analysis of indirect speech reports.Alex Davies - 2021 - Mind and Language 36 (4):533-553.
    This article presents a semantic analysis of indirect speech reports. The analysis aims to explain a combination of two phenomena. First, there are true utterances of sentences of the form α said that φ which are used to report an utterance u of a sentence wherein φ's content is not u's content. This implies that in uttering a single sentence, one can say several things. Second, when the complements of these reports (and indeed, these reports themselves) are placed in conjunctions, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Revisionist reporting.Kyle Blumberg & Harvey Lederman - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 178 (3):755-783.
    Several theorists have observed that attitude reports have what we call “revisionist” uses. For example, even if Pete has never met Ann and has no idea that she exists, Jane can still say to Jim ‘Pete believes Ann can learn to play tennis in ten lessons’ if Pete believes all 6-year-olds can learn to play tennis in ten lessons and it is part of Jane and Jim’s background knowledge that Ann is a 6-year-old. Jane’s assertion seems acceptable because the claim (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations