Abstract
This paper provides a detailed comparison between discourse representation theory and dependent type semantics, two frameworks for discourse semantics. Although it is often stated that DRT and those frameworks based on dependent types are mutually exchangeable, we argue that they differ with respect to variable handling, more specifically, how substitution and other operations on variables are defined. This manifests itself in two recalcitrant problems posed for DRT; namely, the overwrite problem and the duplication problem. We will see that these problems still pose a challenge for various extended compositional systems based on DRT, while they do not arise in a framework of DTS where substitution and other operations are defined in the standard type-theoretic manner without stipulating any additional constraints. We also compare the notions of contexts underlying these two kinds of frameworks, namely, contexts represented as assignment functions and contexts represented as proof terms, and see what different predictions they make for some linguistic examples.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10849-019-09294-3
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,489
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

Dynamic Predicate Logic.Jeroen Groenendijk & Martin Stokhof - 1991 - Linguistics and Philosophy 14 (1):39-100.
A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation.Hans Kamp - 1981 - In P. Portner & B. H. Partee (eds.), Formal Semantics - the Essential Readings. Blackwell. pp. 189--222.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Pure Quotation and General Compositionality.Peter Pagin & Dag Westerståhl - 2010 - Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (5):381-415.
Towards a Variable-Free Semantics.Pauline Jacobson - 1999 - Linguistics and Philosophy 22 (2):117-185.
Are Logical Languages Compositional?Marcus Kracht - 2013 - Studia Logica 101 (6):1319-1340.
A Type Reduction From Proof-Conditional to Dynamic Semantics.Tim Fernando - 2001 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (2):121-153.
The Antinomy of the Variable: A Tarskian Resolution.Bryan Pickel & Brian Rabern - 2016 - Journal of Philosophy 113 (3):137-170.
No Context, No Content, No Problem.Ethan Nowak - 2021 - Mind and Language 36 (2):189-220.
Operating on Functions with Variable Domains.Philip G. Calabrese - 2003 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (1):1-18.
A Higher-Order Theory of Presupposition.Scott Martin & Carl Pollard - 2012 - Studia Logica 100 (4):727-751.
Dynamic Predicate Logic.Jeroen Groenendijk & Martin Stokhof - 1991 - Linguistics and Philosophy 14 (1):39-100.
Categories of First-Order Quantifiers.Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska - 2018 - In Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska & Ángel Garrido (eds.), The Lvov-Warsaw School. Past and Present. Basel, Switzerland: pp. 575-597.
Categories of First -Order Quantifiers.Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska - 2018 - Lvov-Warsaw School. Past and Present.
Quantification and Negation in Event Semantics.Lucas Champollion - 2010 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6 (1).
Compositionality and Modest Inferentialism.James Trafford - 2014 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy (1):39-56.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-05-28

Total views
24 ( #476,297 of 2,520,804 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,623 of 2,520,804 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes