Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Counterfactual Attitudes and the Relational Analysis.Kyle Blumberg - 2018 - Mind 127 (506):521-546.
    In this paper, I raise a problem for standard precisifications of the Relational Analysis of attitude reports. The problem I raise involves counterfactual attitude verbs. such as ‘wish’. In short, the trouble is this: there are true attitude reports ‘ S wishes that P ’ but there is no suitable referent for the term ‘that P ’. The problematic reports illustrate that the content of a subject’s wish is intimately related to the content of their beliefs. I capture this fact (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Demonstratives in philosophy and linguistics.Lynsey Wolter - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (3):451-468.
    Demonstrative noun phrases (e.g., that guy , this ) are of interest to philosophers of language and semanticists because they are sensitive to demonstrations or speaker intentions. The interpretation of a demonstrative therefore sheds light on the role of the context in natural language semantics. This survey reviews two types of approaches to demonstratives: Kaplan's direct reference treatment of demonstratives and other indexicals, and recent challenges to Kaplan's approach that focus on less obviously context-sensitive uses of demonstratives. The survey then (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • A monstrous account of non-deictic readings of complex demonstratives.Joan Gimeno-Simó - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.
    1. Complex demonstratives (noun phrases of the form ‘that F’) often behave in devious ways which do not fit well with their traditional understanding as devices of direct reference. Namely, there a...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On how to legitimately constrain a semantic theory.Joan Gimeno-Simó - 2021 - Semiotica 2021 (240):97-127.
    Semanticists often restrict their theories by imposing constraints on the parameters that can be employed for interpreting the expressions of a language. Such constraints are based on non-logical features of actual contexts of utterance, but they often have important effects on issues that do pertain to logic, like analyticity or entailment. For example, Kaplan’s restriction to so-called “proper contexts” was required in order to count “I am here now” as valid. In this paper I argue that constraints of this kind (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark