The Logicality of Language: A new take on triviality, `ungrammaticality', and logical form

Noûs 53 (4):785-818 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Recent work in formal semantics suggests that the language system includes not only a structure building device, as standardly assumed, but also a natural deductive system which can determine when expressions have trivial truth‐conditions (e.g., are logically true/false) and mark them as unacceptable. This hypothesis, called the ‘logicality of language’, accounts for many acceptability patterns, including systematic restrictions on the distribution of quantifiers. To deal with apparent counter‐examples consisting of acceptable tautologies and contradictions, the logicality of language is often paired with an additional assumption according to which logical forms are radically underspecified: i.e., the language system can see functional terms but is ‘blind’ to open class terms to the extent that different tokens of the same term are treated as if independent. This conception of logical form has profound implications: it suggests an extreme version of the modularity of language, and can only be paired with non‐classical—indeed quite exotic—kinds of deductive systems. The aim of this paper is to show that we can pair the logicality of language with a different and ultimately more traditional account of logical form. This framework accounts for the basic acceptability patterns which motivated the logicality of language, can explain why some tautologies and contradictions are acceptable, and makes better predictions in key cases. As a result, we can pursue versions of the logicality of language in frameworks compatible with the view that the language system is not radically modular vis‐á‐vis its open class terms and employs a deductive system that is basically classical.

Similar books and articles

Quantification and Logical Form.Andrea Iacona - 2015 - In Alessandro Torza (ed.), Quantifiers, Quantifiers, and Quantifiers. Springer. pp. 125-140.
Generalized Quantifiers, Exception Phrases, and Logicality.Shalom Lappin - 1995 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 3 (2-3):203-222.
Extensionality and logicality.Gil Sagi - 2017 - Synthese (Suppl 5):1-25.
Logical form.Christopher Menzel - 1998 - In Edward Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge.
Logical Quantifiers.Gila Sher - 2012 - In D. Graff Fara & G. Russell (eds.), Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Language. Routledge. pp. 579-595.
Characterizing Invariance.Jack Woods - 2016 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 3:778-807.
Logicality and meaning.Gil Sagi - 2018 - Review of Symbolic Logic 11 (1):133-159.
Logical Form: Its Scope and Limits.Thomas Edwin Moody - 1982 - Dissertation, University of Minnesota
Linguistics and natural logic.George Lakoff - 1970 - Synthese 22 (1-2):151 - 271.
Expressivist Perspective on Logicality.Pavel Arazim - 2017 - Logica Universalis 11 (4):409-419.


Added to PP

198 (#70,905)

6 months
37 (#46,659)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Guillermo Del Pinal
University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Citations of this work

Zero N: Number features and ⊥.Luisa Martí - 2022 - Natural Language Semantics 30 (2):215-237.
Semantic monsters.Brian Rabern - 2021 - In Heimir Geirsson & Stephen Biggs (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Reference. Routledge. pp. 515-532.
Inside names.Denis Delfitto & Gaetano Fiorin - 2022 - Evolutionary Linguistic Theory 4 (2):153-190.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Generalized quantifiers and natural language.John Barwise & Robin Cooper - 1981 - Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (2):159--219.
Context and logical form.Jason Stanley - 2000 - Linguistics and Philosophy 23 (4):391--434.
Tolerant, Classical, Strict.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):347-385.
Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language.Jon Barwise - 1980 - Linguistics and Philosophy 4:159.

View all 32 references / Add more references