Natural Language Semantics and Guise Theory

Dissertation, Indiana University (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I assume that the task of natural language semantics is to provide an unambiguous logical language into which natural language can be translated in such a way that the translating expressions display a structure which is isomorphic to the meaning of the translated expressions. Since language is a means of thinking and communicating mental contents, the meanings of singular terms cannot be the individuals of the substratist tradition, because such individuals are not cognizable entities. Thus I propose that the logical language be based on Castaneda's guise theory, according to which singular terms always denote guises, i.e., roughly, bundles of properties. This, I argue, would result in a semantics which is in accordance with projects such as Lakoff's natural logic or Fodor's methodological solipsism. ;I first propose a formal system, GCC, which tries to be as faithful as possible to Castaneda's informal presentation of guise theory. It is therefore characterized by different forms of predication and a distinction between a level of property composition and a level of proposition composition. Such a distinction is dropped in a second system, GF, which presents a more traditional Fregean representation of predication. Yet, GF endorses essential assumptions of guise theory such as the existence of different sameness relations that can provide various interpretations for the English "is". I claim that GF provides more theoretical simplicity than GCC. ;Finally, I show the fruitfulness of the present approach by applying GF to a vast collection of linguistico-philosophical puzzles which includes but is not restricted to those that guise theory was originally designed to address: various versions of Frege's paradox, the paradox of analysis, Quine's puzzle on the number of planets, issues of reidentification and intentional identity, the anaphoric "it" of sentences such as "the lizard's tail fell off but then it grew back," problems connected with the use of "knowing-who ," proper names, indexicals and demonstratives

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,853

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

Foundations of intensional semantics.Chris Fox - 2005 - Malden MA: Blackwell. Edited by Shalom Lappin.
Guises and their existence.Alberto Voltolini - 1996 - Axiomathes 7 (3):419-434.
How many bare demonstratives are there in English?Christopher Gauker - 2014 - Linguistics and Philosophy 37 (4):291-314.
Logical Form: Its Scope and Limits.Thomas Edwin Moody - 1982 - Dissertation, University of Minnesota

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
25 (#633,195)

6 months
6 (#520,848)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Guise Theory Revisited.Francesco Orilia - 2013 - Humana Mente 6 (25).

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references