The difference between indexicals and demonstratives

Synthese 195 (7):3173-3196 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I propose a new way to distinguish between indexicals, like “I” and “today”, and demonstratives, like “she” and “this”. The main test case is the second person singular pronoun “you”. The tradition would generally count it as a demonstrative, because the speaker’s intentions play a role in providing it with a semantic value. I present cross-linguistic data and explanations offered of the data in typology and semantics to show that “you” belongs on the indexical side, and argue that they can be generalized to a novel criterion for distinguishing between indexicals and demonstratives. The central theoretical claim is that the semantic values of indexicals are objects which play certain utterance-related roles, which are fixed independently of the words being used in the utterance. For instance, the speaker plays the speaker role whether or not she uses the word “I”, and the addressee plays that role whether or not the speaker uses the word “you”. Demonstratives, on the other hand, pick out objects that play no such role, and are instead helped by the speaker’s word-specific intentions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

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 impurity of “pure” indexicals.Allyson Mount - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 138 (2):193 - 209.
Demonstratives and Indexicals.Geoff Georgi - 2015 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Indexicals and Demonstratives.John Perry - 1997 - In Bob Hale & Crispin Wright (eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Language. Blackwell. pp. 486--612.
Indexical identification: A perspectival account.Tomis Kapitan - 2001 - Philosophical Psychology 14 (3):293 – 312.
Demonstratives in philosophy and linguistics.Lynsey Wolter - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (3):451-468.
Why Bare Demonstratives Need Not Semantically Refer.J. P. Smit - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):43-66.
Smith on Indexicals.Daniel Asher Krasner - 2006 - Synthese 153 (1):49-67.
A Note on Essential Indexicals of Direction.Rogério Passos Severo - 2012 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (1):10-15.
Context of utterance and intended context.Claudia Bianchi - 2001 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2116:73-86.
Indexicals, Contexts and Unarticulated Constituents.John Perry - 1998 - In Atocha Aliseda-Llera, Rob J. Van Glabbeek & Dag Westerståhl (eds.), Proceedings of the 1995 CSLI-Armsterdam Logic, Language and Computation Conference. CSLI Publications.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-12

Downloads
72 (#223,508)

6 months
11 (#226,803)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alex Radulescu
University of Missouri, Columbia

References found in this work

Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and other Indexicals.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.
Individualism and the mental.Tyler Burge - 1979 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4 (1):73-122.
Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - Philosophy 56 (217):431-433.
Naming and Necessity.S. Kripke - 1972 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (4):665-666.

View all 61 references / Add more references