The superlative quantifiers, at least and at most, are commonly assumed to have the same truth-conditions as the comparative quantifiers more than and fewer than. However, as Geurts & Nouwen have demonstrated, this is wrong, and several theories have been proposed to account for them. In this paper we propose that superlative quantifiers are illocutionary operators; specifically, they modify meta-speech acts.Meta speech-acts are operators that do not express a speech act, but a willingness to make or refrain from making a (...) certain speech act. The classic example is speech act denegation, e.g. I don't promise to come, where the speaker is explicitly refraining from performing the speech act of promising What denegations do is to delimit the future development of conversation, that is, they delimit future admissible speech acts. Hence we call them meta-speech acts. They are not moves in a game, but rather commitments to behave in certain ways in the future. We formalize the notion of meta speech acts as commitment development spaces, which are rooted graphs: The root of the graph describes the commitment development up to the current point in conversation; the continuations from the root describe the admissible future directions.We define and formalize the meta-speech act GRANT, which indicates that the speaker, while not necessarily subscribing to a proposition, refrains from asserting its negation. We propose that superlative quantifiers are quantifiers over GRANTs. Thus, Mary petted at least three rabbits means that the minimal number n such that the speaker GRANTs that Mary petted n rabbits is n = 3. In other words, the speaker denies that Mary petted two, one, or no rabbits, but GRANTs that she petted more.We formalize this interpretation of superlative quantifiers in terms of commitment development spaces, and show how the truth conditions that are derived from it are partly entailed and partly conversationally implicated. We demonstrates how the theory accounts for a wide variety of phenomena regarding the interpretation of superlative quantifiers, their distribution, and the contexts in which they can be embedded. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialtheorie und Philosophie Jahrgang: 3 Heft: 1 Seiten: 67-93.

This reply to three reviews of the book Development of Emotions and Emotion Regulation (2006) discusses the criticisms of our internalization model of emotional development. The model highlights the significance of expressions for the ontogenetic differentiation of emotions. We focus particularly on the reviewers’ remarks on the degree and usefulness of an internalization of emotional expression signs, on the methodological problems when assessing internalized expression signs, and on the development of a strategic use of expression signs in social interactions. Finally, (...) we agree with the reviewers’ emphasis on the need to consider how the interplay between the development of emotions and emotion regulation leads to the emergence of increasing cultural differences throughout the course of ontogenesis. (shrink)

Sind Wissenschaften und Universitäten (noch) gesellschaftlich und politisch relevant? Die Beiträge dieses Bandes setzen sich mit den politischen Voraussetzungen und Implikationen der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit auseinander und plädieren für die Wahrnehmung gesellschaftlicher Verantwortung durch Wissenschaft und Universität.

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Die Zukunft der Katastrophe" verfügbar.

Im Rahmen einer Erörterung der Philosophie J.G. Fichtes liegt die wissenschaftliche Bedeutung J.B. Schads nicht darin, daß dieser besonders scharfsinnig interpretierend oder kommentierend an die Wissenschaftslehre herangegangen sei. Das weist er selbst ausdrücklich von sich. Vielmehr kann die philosophische Leistung Schads, die es rechtfertigt, auf einem Fichte-Kongreß auch auf ihn näher einzugehen, darin gesehen werden, daß er als erster den Versuch macht, die Philosophie Fichtes nicht nur allgemeinverständlich darzustellen, sondern sie auch relativ frei aus sich selbst heraus nachzuentwickeln.