Witnesses

Linguistics and Philosophy 45 (5):1091-1117 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The meaning of definite descriptions (like ‘the King of France’, ‘the girl’, etc.) has been a central topic in philosophy and linguistics for the past century. Indefinites (‘Something is on the floor’, ‘A child sat down’, etc.) have been relatively neglected in philosophy, under the Russellian assumption that they can be unproblematically treated as existential quantifiers. However, an important tradition, drawing from Stoic logic, has pointed to patterns which suggest that indefinites cannot be treated simply as existential quantifiers. The standard dynamic semantic treatment of those phenomena, however, has well-known problems with negation and disjunction. In this paper I develop a new approach to (in)definites. On my theory, truth-conditions are classical. But in addition to truth-conditions, meanings comprise a second dimension of what I call bounds. It is at the level of bounds, not truth-conditions, that I locate the characteristically dynamic coordination between indefinites and definites. The resulting system thus has a classical logic. This approach avoids dynamic semantics’ logical problems, and, more generally, yields a new perspective on the relation between truth-conditional and dynamic effects in natural language.

Similar books and articles

Definiteness Projection.Matthew Mandelkern & Daniel Rothschild - 2019 - Natural Language Semantics:1-33.
Descriptions and beyond.Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.) - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Why indefinites can escape scope islands.Edgar Onea - 2015 - Linguistics and Philosophy 38 (3):237-267.
Donkey anaphora: the view from sign language (ASL and LSF).Philippe Schlenker - 2011 - Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (4):341-395.
Indefinites and intentional identity.Samuel Cumming - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 168 (2):371-395.
Definiteness and determinacy.Elizabeth Coppock & David Beaver - 2015 - Linguistics and Philosophy 38 (5):377-435.
Descriptions, truth value intuitions, and questions.Anders J. Schoubye - 2009 - Linguistics and Philosophy 32 (6):583-617.
Construction by Description in Discourse Representation.Noor van Leusen & Reinhard Muskens - 2003 - In Jaroslav Peregrin (ed.), Meaning: the dynamic turn. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science. pp. 33-65.
Discourse dynamics, pragmatics, and indefinites.Karen S. Lewis - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 158 (2):313-342.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-09-04

Downloads
562 (#32,111)

6 months
157 (#21,023)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Matthew Mandelkern
New York University

Citations of this work

Fictional Names and Co-Identification.Andreas Stokke - 2023 - Philosophers' Imprint 23:1-23.
Pronouns as Demonstratives.Kyle Blumberg - 2021 - Philosophers' Imprint 21 (35).
Trivalence and Anaphora.Matthew Mandelkern - forthcoming - In Paul Egré & Lorenzo Rossi (eds.), Handbook of Three-Valued Logics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reference and generality.P. T. Geach - 1962 - Ithaca, N.Y.,: Cornell University Press. Edited by Michael C. Rea.
Assertion.Robert Stalnaker - 1978 - Syntax and Semantics (New York Academic Press) 9:315-332.
Assertion.Robert Stalnaker - 1978 - In Maite Ezcurdia & Robert J. Stainton (eds.), The Semantics-Pragmatics Boundary in Philosophy. Broadview Press. pp. 179.

View all 54 references / Add more references