Related categories
Subcategories:
513 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 513
Material to categorize
  1. Fred Adams & Murray Clarke (2007). Defending the Tracking Theories of Knowledge. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:3-8.
    Since Kripke's attack on Nozick's Tracking Theory of knowledge, there has been strong suspicion that tracking theories are false. We think that neither Kripke's arguments and examples nor other recent attacks in the literature show that the tracking theories are false. We cannot address all of these concerns here, but we will show why some of the most discussed examples from Kripke do not demonstrate that the tracking theories are false.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Masahiko Aihara (2009). The Scope of -Est: Evidence From Japanese. [REVIEW] Natural Language Semantics 17 (4):341-367.
    It has long been observed that the superlative construction, exemplified by John climbed the highest mountain, has two readings. On the absolute reading, the heights of the relevant mountains in a relevant context are compared; on the comparative reading, relevant climbers’ achievements of mountain climbing are compared (Szabolcsi, Comparative superlatives, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 1986). Two theories have been proposed regarding this ambiguity. One theory holds that it results from movement of the superlative morpheme -est (movement theory) (Heim, Association (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Varol Akman & Mehmet Surav (1997). The Use of Situation Theory in Context Modeling. Philosophical Explorations.
    At the heart of natural language processing is the understanding of context dependent meanings. This paper presents a preliminary model of formal contexts based on situation theory. It also gives a worked-out example to show the use of contexts in lifting, i.e., how propositions holding in a particular context transform when they are moved to another context. This is useful in NLP applications where preserving meaning is a desideratum.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Eric Alliez (2008). A Very Different Context. Radical Philosophy 149:18-21.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Knowledge Assertion (2002). Context'. Philosophical Review 111:167-203.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jay David Atlas (2007). Meanings, Propositions, Context, and Semantical Underdeterminacy. In G. Preyer (ed.), Context Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Peter Auer & Aldo Di Luzio (eds.) (1992). The Contextualization of Language. J. Benjamins.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Kent Bach, Relatively Speaking.
    Puzzles about sentences containing expressions of certain sorts, such as predicates of personal taste, epistemic modals, and ‘know’, have spawned families of views that go by the names of Contextualism and Relativism. In the case of predicates of personal taste, which I will be focusing on, contextualist views say that the contents of sentences like “Uni is delicious” and “The Aristocrats is hilarious” vary somehow with the context of utterance. Such a sentence semantically expresses different propositions in different contexts, depending (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Alan Clinton Bale (2011). Scales and Comparison Classes. Natural Language Semantics 19 (2):169-190.
    This paper discusses comparison classes—sets that relativize the interpretation of gradable adjectives, often specified with for-clauses as in John is smart for a linguist. Such a discussion ultimately lends support to the thesis that scales, degrees, measure functions, and linear orders are grammatically derived from more basic relations between individuals. Three accounts of comparison classes are compared and evaluated. The first proposes that such classes serve as an argument to a function that determines a standard of comparison. The second maintains (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Mark Bevir (2000). The Role of Contexts in Understanding and Explanation. Human Studies 23 (4):395-411.
    In considering the Cambridge School of intellectual history, we should distinguish Skinner's conventionalism from Pocock's contextualism whilst recognising that both of them argue that the study of a text's linguistic context is at least necessary and perhaps sufficient to ensure understanding. This paper suggests that although "study the linguistic context of an utterance" is a valuable heuristic maxim, it is not a prerequisite of understanding that one does so. Hence, we might shift our attention from the role of linguistic contexts (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Gunnar Björnsson & Alexander Almér (2010). The Pragmatics of Insensitive Assessments: Understanding The Relativity of Assessments of Judgments of Personal Taste, Epistemic Modals, and More. In Barbara H. Partee, Michael Glanzberg & Jurģis Šķilters (eds.), The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication. 1-45.
    In assessing the veridicality of utterances, we normally seem to assess the satisfaction of conditions that the speaker had been concerned to get right in making the utterance. However, the debate about assessor-relativism about epistemic modals, predicates of taste, gradable adjectives and conditionals has been largely driven by cases in which seemingly felicitous assessments of utterances are insensitive to aspects of the context of utterance that were highly relevant to the speaker’s choice of words. In this paper, we offer an (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Thomas A. Blackson (2004). An Invalid Argument for Contextualism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (2):344–345.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Thomas Bonk (ed.) (2003). Language, Truth and Knowledge. Kluwer.
    This collection, with essays by Graham H. Bird, Jaakko Hintikka, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Jan Wolenski, will interest graduate students of the philosophy of language ...
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Emma Borg (2010). Meaning and Context: A Survey of a Contemporary Debate. In Daniel Whiting (ed.), The Later Wittgenstein on Language. Palgrave Macmillan.
    relevant to the differences between the two speakings, Odile’s words in the first case said what was false, while in the second case they said what was true. Both spoke of the same state of the world, or the same refrigerator in the same condition. So, in the first case, the words said what is false of a refrigerator with but a milk puddle; in the second case they said what is true of such a refrigerator.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Peter Bosch (2009). Predicate Indexicality and Context Dependence. In Philippe de Brabanter & Mikhail Kissine (eds.), Utterance Interpretation and Cognitive Models. Emmerald Publishers. 20.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Adrian Brasoveanu (2013). The Grammar of Quantification and the Fine Structure of Interpretation Contexts. Synthese 190 (15):3001-3051.
    Providing a compositional interpretation procedure for discourses in which descriptions of complex dependencies between interrelated objects are incrementally built is a key challenge for formal theories of natural language interpretation. This paper examines several quantificational phenomena and argues that to account for these phenomena, we need richly structured contexts of interpretation that are passed on between different parts of the same sentence and also across sentential boundaries. The main contribution of the paper is showing how we can add structure to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Adrian Briciu (2007). Insensitive Semantics. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 7 (3):499-506.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Jason Bridges, Pulling Semantic Contextualism Out by its Roots.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Jason Bridges (2012). Context and Use. The Harvard Review of Philosophy 18 (1):133-142.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Ingar Brinck (1999). Procedures and Strategies: Context-Dependence in Creativity. Philosophica 64 (2):33-47.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Peter Burke (2002). Context in Context. Common Knowledge 8 (1):152-177.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Ben Caplan (2006). Review of Stefano Predelli, Contexts: Meaning, Truth, and the Use of Language. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2006 (11).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Herman Cappelen (2008). The Creative Interpreter: Content Relativism and Assertion. Noûs 42 (1):23 - 46.
    Philosophers of language and linguists tend to think of the interpreter as an essentially non-creative participant in the communicative process. There’s no room, in traditional theories, for the view that correctness of interpretation depends in some essential way on the interpreter. As a result, there’s no room for the possibility that while P is the correct interpretation of an utterance, u, for one interpreter, P* is the correct interpretation of that utterance for another interpreter. Recently, a number of theorists have, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Herman Cappelen & Ernie Lepore (2005). Radical and Moderate Pragmatics: Does Meaning Determine Truth Conditions? In Zoltán Gendler Szabó (ed.), Semantics versus Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
    But the sort of context sensitivity exhibited in such sentences does not compromise the claim that meaning determines truth conditions, since recourse to context here is directed and restricted by conventional meaning alone. Anyone who understands sentence (2) knows that its utterances are true just in case whatever object is demonstrated in the context of utterance is nice; and he also knows that any utterance of (2) says of, or expresses about, whichever object is demonstrated that it’s nice. (Similarly, anyone (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Mat Carmody (2007). Insensitive Semantics. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 57 (228):472–478.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Mat Carmody (2007). Review: Insensitive Semantics. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 57 (228):472 - 478.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Elżbieta Chrzanowska-Kluczewska & Agnieszka Gołda-Derejczyk (eds.) (2009). The Contextuality of Language and Culture. Wydawnictwo Wseh.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Daihyun Chung (2008). Fitting. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 39:35-41.
    Notions of fitting seem to be attractive in explaining language understanding. This paper tries to interpret "fitting" in terms of holistic (cheng, 誠) intentionality rather than the dualistic one. I propose to interpret “cheng” as a notion of integration: The cheng of an entity is the power to realize the embedded objective of it in the context where it interacts with all others; "Mind" refers to the ability of not a single kind of entity but to that of all entities (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Nicolas Clerbout, Marie-Hélène Gorisse & Shahid Rahman (2011). Context-Sensitivity in Jain Philosophy: A Dialogical Study of Siddharṣigaṇi's Commentary on the Handbook of Logic. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (5):633-662.
    In classical India, Jain philosophers developed a theory of viewpoints ( naya-vāda ) according to which any statement is always performed within and dependent upon a given epistemic perspective or viewpoint. The Jainas furnished this epistemology with an (epistemic) theory of disputation that takes into account the viewpoint in which the main thesis has been stated. The main aim of our paper is to delve into the Jain notion of viewpoint-contextualisation and to develop the elements of a suitable logical system (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Arthur B. Cody (2002). Words, You, and Me. Inquiry 45 (3):277 – 293.
    It is tempting to explicate the mastery of language, as many philosophers have, with how we come to learn language. Interpreting how we come to learn a language necessarily involves saying what the mind's relevant capacities are. Too long we have been told that those capacities are adaptive to, as well as within, a social context; it seemed plausible to argue that we learn to have (propositional) thoughts as we learn and use the language conatively. This essay tries to persuade (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. E. I. Coffman (2012). Contextualism and Interest-Relative. In Andrew Cullison (ed.), The Continuum Companion to Epistemology. Continuum. 199.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Annalisa Coliva & Sebastiano Moruzzi (2012). Truth Relativists Can't Trump Moral Progress. Analytic Philosophy 53 (1):48-57.
  33. Edmund Dain (2008). Wittgenstein, Contextualism, and Nonsense. Journal of Philosophical Research 33:101-125.
    What nonsense might be, and what Wittgenstein thought that nonsense might be, are two of the central questions in the current debate between those—such as Cora Diamond, James Conant and Michael Kremer—who favour a “resolute” approach to Wittgenstein’s work, and those—such as P. M. S. Hacker and Hans-Johann Glock—who instead favour a more “traditional” approach. What answer we give to these questions will determine the nature and force of his criticisms of traditional philosophy, and so the very shape Wittgenstein’s work (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Wayne A. Davis (2006). Review of Gerhard Preyer, Georg Peter (Eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy: Knowledge, Meaning, and Truth. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2006 (7).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Richard T. De George (1974). Reason, Truth, and Context. Idealistic Studies 4 (1):35-49.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Dan López de Sa (2014). Audience in Context. Erkenntnis 79 (1):241-253.
    In recent discussions on contextualism and relativism, some have suggested that audience-sensitivity motivates a content relativist version of radical relativism, according to which a sentence as said at a context can have different contents with respect to the different perspectives from where it is assessed. The first aim of this note is to illustrate how this is not so. According to Egan himself, the phenomenon motivates at least refinement of the characteristic moderate contention that features of a single context determine (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. K. DeRose & Knowledge Assertion (2002). Context', Hereafter AKC. Philosophical Review 3:167-203.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Keith DeRose (2002). ``Assertion, Knowledge, and Context&Quot. Philosophical Review 111:167-203.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Keith DeRose, Reply to Nagel 5/23; 18bot+End.
    The key test cases for deciding between my brand of contextualism and Jennifer Nagel’s brand of invariantism are the third-person examples. As matters currently stand, first-person cases, like my original Bank cases (pp. 1-2), are pretty useless here. Nagel can agree that the speaker’s claim to “know” in Case A and his admission that he doesn’t “know” in Case B are both true; she just accepts a different account of why it is that both assertions can be, and are, true, (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Jaap van Der Does & Michiel Van Lambalgen (2000). A Logic of Vision. Linguistics and Philosophy 23 (1):1 - 92.
    This essay attempts to develop a psychologically informed semantics of perception reports, whose predictions match with the linguistic data. As suggested by the quotation from Miller and Johnson-Laird, we take a hallmark of perception to be its fallible nature; the resulting semantics thus necessarily differs from situation semantics. On the psychological side, our main inspiration is Marr's (1982) theory of vision, which can easily accomodate fallible perception. In Marr's theory, vision is a multi-layered process. The different layers have filters of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Christos Douskos (2013). The Linguistic Argument for Intellectualism. Synthese 190 (12):2325-2340.
    A central argument against Ryle’s (The concept of mind, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1949) distinction between propositional and non propositional knowledge has relied on linguistic evidence. Stanley and Williamson (J Philos 98:411–444, 2001) have claimed that knowing-how ascriptions do not differ in any relevant syntactic or semantic respect from ascriptions of propositional knowledge, concluding thereby that knowing-how ascriptions attribute propositional knowledge, or a kind thereof. In this paper I examine the cross-linguistic basis of this argument. I focus on the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Janice Dowell, J. L. (2013). Flexible Contextualism About Deontic Modals: A Puzzle About Information-Sensitivity. Inquiry 56 (2-3):149-178.
    According to a recent challenge to Kratzer's canonical contextualist semantics for deontic modal expressions, no contextualist view can make sense of cases in which such a modal must be information-sensitive in some way. Here I show how Kratzer's semantics is compatible with readings of the targeted sentences that fit with the data. I then outline a general account of how contexts select parameter values for modal expressions and show, in terms of that account, how the needed, contextualist-friendly readings might plausibly (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Janice Dowell, J. L. (2011). A Flexible Contextualist Account of Epistemic Modals. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (14):1-25.
    On Kratzer’s canonical account, modal expressions (like “might” and “must”) are represented semantically as quantifiers over possibilities. Such expressions are themselves neutral; they make a single contribution to determining the propositions expressed across a wide range of uses. What modulates the modality of the proposition expressed—as bouletic, epistemic, deontic, etc.—is context.2 This ain’t the canon for nothing. Its power lies in its ability to figure in a simple and highly unified explanation of a fairly wide range of language use. Recently, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Bruce Edmonds (2013). Complexity and Context-Dependency. Foundations of Science 18 (4):745-755.
    It is argued that given the “anti-anthropomorphic” principle—that the universe is not structured for our benefit—modelling trade-offs will necessarily mean that many of our models will be context-specific. It is argued that context-specificity is not the same as relativism. The “context heuristic”—that of dividing processing into rich, fuzzy context-recognition and crisp, conscious reasoning and learning—is outlined. The consequences of accepting the impact of this human heuristic in the light of the necessity of accepting context-specificity in our modelling of complex systems (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Richard Feldman (2004). Comments on DeRose's “Single Scoreboard Semantics”. Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):23-33.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Tim Fernando, Temporal Propositions as Vague Predicates.
    The idea that temporal propositions are vague predicates is examined with attention to the nature of the objects over which the predicates range. These objects should not, it is argued, be identified once and for all with points or intervals in the real line (or any fixed linear order). Context has an important role to play not only in sidestepping the Sorites paradox (Gaifman 2002) but also in shaping temporal moments/extent (Landman 1991). The Russell-Wiener construction of time from events (Kamp (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jerry Fodor & Ernie Lepore (2004). Out of Context. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 78 (2):77-94.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Itamar Francez (2010). Context Dependence and Implicit Arguments in Existentials. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (1):11-30.
    This paper discusses the semantics of bare existentials , i.e. existentials in which nothing follows the post copular NP (e.g. There are four sections ). While it has sometimes been recognized that the interpretation of such sentences depends in some way on context, the exact nature of the context dependence involved has not been properly understood. It is shown that the meaning of bare existentials involves a set-denoting implicit argument, and that the range of interpretations found with bare existentials is (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Recanati François, Stojanovic Isidora & Villanueva Neftali (eds.) (2010). Context Dependence, Perpsective and Relativity. Mouton de Gruyter.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Dov Gabbay, Rolf Nossum & John Woods (2006). Context-Dependent Abduction and Relevance. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (1):65 - 81.
    Based on the premise that what is relevant, consistent, or true may change from context to context, a formal framework of relevance and context is proposed in which • contexts are mathematical entities • each context has its own language with relevant implication • the languages of distinct contexts are connected by embeddings • inter-context deduction is supported by bridge rules • databases are sets of formulae tagged with deductive histories and the contexts they belong to • abduction and revision (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 513