Cognitive Science 45 (11):e13058 (2021)

Authors
Niels Skovgaard-Olsen
Universität Göttingen
Abstract
It is widely held that there are important differences between indicative conditionals (e.g. “If the authors are linguists, they have written a linguistics paper”) and subjunctive conditionals (e.g. “If the authors had been linguists, they would have written a linguistics paper”). A central difference is that indicatives and subjunctives convey different stances towards the truth of their antecedents. Indicatives (often) convey neutrality: for example, about whether the authors in question are linguists. Subjunctives (often) convey the falsity of the antecedent: for example, that the authors in question are not linguists. This paper tests prominent accounts of how these different stances are conveyed: whether by presupposition or conversational implicature. Experiment 1 tests the presupposition account by investigating whether the stances project – remain constant – when embedded under operators like negations, possibility modals, and interrogatives, a key characteristic of presuppositions. Experiment 2 tests the conversational-implicature account by investigating whether the stances can be cancelled without producing a contradiction, a key characteristic of implicatures. The results provide evidence that both stances – neutrality about the antecedent in indicatives and the falsity of the antecedent in subjunctives – are conveyed by conversational implicatures.
Keywords Conversational implicature  Falsity of the antecedent  Indicative conditionals  Presupposition  Subjunctive conditionals
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/cogs.13058
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Studies in the Way of Words.H. P. Grice - 1989 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

View all 67 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Presuppositions and Antipresuppositions in Conditionals.Brian Leahy - 2011 - Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory:257-274.
Presupposing Counterfactuality.Julia Zakkou - 2019 - Semantics and Pragmatics.
Subjunctive Biscuit and Stand-Off Conditionals.Eric Swanson - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 163 (3):637-648.
Recent Discussion of Subjunctive Conditionals.Erna F. Schneider - 1953 - Review of Metaphysics 6 (4):623 - 649.
Presuppositions, Composition, and Simple Subjunctives.Walter Kasper - 1992 - Journal of Semantics 9 (4):307-331.
I-Counterfactuals.Dorothy Edgington - 2008 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 108 (1pt1):1-21.
Indicative and Subjunctive Conditionals.Brian Weatherson - 2001 - Philosophical Quarterly 51 (203):200-216.
Conversation and Conditionals.J. Robert G. Williams - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 138 (2):211 - 223.
Biscuit Conditionals and Prohibited ‘Then’.Julia Zakkou - 2017 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 6 (2):84-92.
Knowledge in the Face of Conspiracy Conditionals.Ben Holguín - 2020 - Linguistics and Philosophy 44 (3):737-771.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-09-24

Total views
114 ( #101,409 of 2,499,073 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #17,943 of 2,499,073 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes