Transparent and Opaque Contextual Sensitivity

ProtoSociology 38:87-105 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Lots of contextually sensitive expressions appear to have context invariant meanings that do not by themselves suffice to secure semantic values for those expressions in context. For example, suppose I say 1. She is smart. where I do not demonstrate any female, I don’t intend that some female is the semantic value of my use of ‘she’, no female is uniquely salient in the context of utterance, and no female has been under discussion. It would appear in such a case that the context invariant meaning of ‘she’ does not secure a semantic value in context for my use of ‘she’, resulting in infelicity. After all, what would that semantic value in context be? This appears to show that the context invariant meaning of ‘she’ does not by itself secure semantic values in context for it. The class of expressions that are like ‘she’ in this respect is quite large. It arguably includes simple and complex demonstratives, tense, expressions taking implicit arguments, gradable adjectives, quantifiers, ‘only’, possessives, conditionals, modals and more. I call these expressions supplementives to highlight the fact that their context invariant meanings need to be supplemented in context for them to secure semantic values in context. I claim that supplementives differ from each other in the following two ways: 1. The degree to which normal speakers are explicitly aware that the expression is contextually sensitive. 2. The degree to which ordinary speakers are explicitly aware of what sort of semantic value in context the expression takes. I hold the view that semantic values in context for supplementives are fixed by recognizable speaker intentions. However, I argue that given the differences between supplementives with respect to 1 and 2, the intentions fixing the semantic values in context of supplementives that differ with respect to 1 and 2 will themselves be different, while still all being speaker intentions that some entity o be the semantic value of the use of the supplementive in context.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Metasemantics of Contextual Sensitivity.Jeffrey C. King - 2014 - In Brett Sherman & Alexis Burgess (eds.), Metasemantics: New Essays on the Foundations of Meaning. Oxford University Press. pp. 97-118.
Kent Bach on Speaker Intentions and Context.Jeffrey C. King - 2013 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 13 (2):161-168.
Colour Layering and Colour Relationalism.Derek H. Brown - 2015 - Minds and Machines 25 (2):177-191.
Assessment-contextual indexicals.Josh Parsons - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (1):1 - 17.
Intentionality.Pierre Le Morvan - 2005 - Journal of Philosophical Research 30:283-302.
Salmon trapping.Takashi Yagisawa - 1997 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (2):351-370.
Intentionality: Transparent, translucent, and opaque.Pierre Le Morvan - 2005 - Journal of Philosophical Research 30:283-302.
Opaque Updates.Michael Cohen - 2020 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 50 (3):447-470.
Transparent and opaque reference.Robert Ray - 1980 - Philosophical Studies 38 (4):435 - 445.
Knowledge embedded.Dirk Kindermann - 2019 - Synthese (5):4035-4055.
What New Wave Materialists Can't Say.Patrick Kuehner Lewtas - 2014 - Philosophical Forum 45 (2):115-132.
Transparent and Opaque Performance Personas.Wesley D. Cray - 2019 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 77 (2):181-191.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-09

Downloads
17 (#742,366)

6 months
9 (#145,127)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jeff King
University of New South Wales

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references