Demonstratives, Definite Descriptions and Non-redundancy

Philosophical Studies:1-26 (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In some sentences, demonstratives can be substituted with definite descriptions without any change in meaning. In light of this, many have maintained that demonstratives are just a type of definite description. However, several theorists have drawn attention to a range of cases where definite descriptions are acceptable, but their demonstrative counterparts are not. Some have tried to account for this data by appealing to presupposition. I argue that such presuppositional approaches are problematic, and present a pragmatic account of the target contrasts. On this approach, demonstratives take two arguments and generally require that the first, covert argument is non-redundant with respect to the second, overt argument. I derive this condition through an economy principle discussed by Schlenker (2005).
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BLUDDD
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-10-04
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Demonstratives.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.
On Quantifier Domain Restriction.Stanley, Jason & Gendler Szabó, Zoltan
On Quantifier Domain Restriction.Stanley, Jason & Szabó, Zoltán Gendler

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-10-04

Total downloads
73 ( #23,606 of 35,924 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
73 ( #4,272 of 35,924 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.