This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
94 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 94
  1. Maria Aloni (2008). Concealed Questions Under Cover. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1):191-216.
    Our evaluation of questions and knowledge attributions may vary relative to the way in which the relevant objects are identified. In the first part, the article proposes a theory that represents different methods of trans-world identification and is able to account for their impact on interpretation. In the second part, the same theory is used to account for the meaning of concealed questions. On the proposed account, the interpretation of a concealed question results from the application of a type-shifting operation (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Maria Aloni (2005). A Formal Treatment of the Pragmatics of Questions and Attitudes. Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (5):505 - 539.
    This article discusses pragmatic aspects of our interpretation of intensional constructions like questions and prepositional attitude reports. In the first part, it argues that our evaluation of these constructions may vary relative to the identification methods operative in the context of use. This insight is then given a precise formalization in a possible world semantics. In the second part, an account of actual evaluations of questions and attitudes is proposed in the framework of bi-directional optimality theory. Pragmatic meaning selections are (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Maria Aloni & Paul Égré (2010). Alternative Questions and Knowledge Attributions. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (238):1-27.
    We discuss the 'problem of convergent knowledge', an argument presented by J. Schaffer in favour of contextualism about knowledge attributions, and against the idea that knowledge- wh can be simply reduced to knowledge of the proposition answering the question. Schaffer's argument centrally involves alternative questions of the form 'whether A or B'. We propose an analysis of these on which the problem of convergent knowledge does not arise. While alternative questions can contextually restrict the possibilities relevant for knowledge attributions, what (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Maria Aloni & Floris Roelofsen (2011). Interpreting Concealed Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (5):443-478.
    Concealed questions are determiner phrases that are naturally paraphrased as embedded questions (e.g., John knows the capital of Italy ≈ John knows what the capital of Italy is). This paper offers a novel account of the interpretation of concealed questions, which assumes that an entity-denoting expression α may be type-shifted into an expression ?z.P(α), where P is a contextually determined property, and z ranges over a contextually determined domain of individual concepts. Different resolutions of P and the domain of z (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Scott AnderBois (2012). Focus and Uninformativity in Yucatec Maya Questions. Natural Language Semantics 20 (4):349-390.
    Crosslinguistically, questions frequently make crucial use of morphosyntactic elements which also occur outside of questions. Chief among these are focus, disjunctions, and wh-words with indefinite semantics. This paper provides a compositional account of the semantics of wh-, alternative, and polar questions in Yucatec Maya (YM), which are composed primarily of these elements. Key to the account is a theory of disjunctions and indefinites (extending work by others) which recognizes the inherently inquisitive nature of these elements. While disjunctions and indefinites are (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Karlos Arregi (2003). Clausal Pied-Piping. Natural Language Semantics 11 (2):115-143.
    In Basque, wh-movement can pied-pipe an entire clause. The surface syntax of clausal pied-piping structures suggests that their syntax and semantics should be similar to scope marking constructions as analyzed in the Indirect Dependency approach. However, data having to do with presupposition projection and the interpretation of how many-questions show that clausal pied-piping structures are actually more similar to their long-distance wh-movement counterparts than to scope marking constructions. I develop an analysis which takes into account these facts. Specifically, I show (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Nicholas Asher & Alex Lascarides (1998). Questions in Dialogue. Linguistics and Philosophy 21 (3):237-309.
    In this paper we explore how compositional semantics, discourse structure, and the cognitive states of participants all contribute to pragmatic constraints on answers to questions in dialogue. We synthesise formal semantic theories on questions and answers with techniques for discourse interpretation familiar from computational linguistics, and show how this provides richer constraints on responses in dialogue than either component can achieve alone.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. A. Z. B. (1966). An Analysis of Questions. Review of Metaphysics 20 (2):362-362.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Kent Bach, Questions and Answers.
    Jonathan is known for his answers as well as his questions. In fact, he is known for giving the same answer to different questions. This illustrates his point about convergent questions: different questions can have the same answer. Jonathan relies on this point to show that if p is the answer to a certain question, knowing the answer to that question doesn’t consist merely in knowing that p. Since p is the answer to many questions, and you can know the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Sigrid Beck & Hotze Rullmann (1999). A Flexible Approach to Exhaustivity in Questions. Natural Language Semantics 7 (3):249-298.
    A semantics for interrogatives is presented which is based on Karttunen's theory, but in a flexible manner incorporates both weak and strong exhaustivity. The paper starts out by considering degree questions, which often require an answer picking out the maximal degree from a certain set. However, in some cases, depending on the semantic properties of the question predicate, reference to the minimal degree is required, or neither specifying the maximum nor the minimum is sufficient. What is needed is an operation (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Michael Bennett (1977). A Response to Karttunen on Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (2):279 - 300.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. María Biezma & Kyle Rawlins (2012). Responding to Alternative and Polar Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 35 (5):361-406.
    This paper gives an account of the differences between polar and alternative questions, as well as an account of the division of labor between compositional semantics and pragmatics in interpreting these types of questions. Alternative questions involve a strong exhaustivity presupposition for the mentioned alternatives. We derive this compositionally from the meaning of the final falling tone and its interaction with the pragmatics of questioning in discourse. Alternative questions are exhaustive in two ways: they exhaust the space of epistemic possibilities, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Maria Bittner (1998). Cross-Linguistic Semantics for Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 21 (1):1-82.
    : The Hamblin-Karttunen approach has led to many insights about questions in English. In this article the results of this rule-by-rule tradition are reconsidered from a crosslinguistic perspective. Starting from the type-driven XLS theory developed in Bittner (1994a, b), it is argued that evidence from simple questions (in English, Polish, Lakhota and Warlpiri) leads to certain revisions. The revised XLS theory then immediately generalizes to complex questions — including scope marking (Hindi), questions with quantifiers (English) and multiple wh-questions (English, Hindi, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Reinhard Blutner (2012). Questions and Answers in an Orthoalgebraic Approach. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21 (3):237-277.
    Taking the lead from orthodox quantum theory, I will introduce a handy generalization of the Boolean approach to propositions and questions: the orthoalgebraic framework. I will demonstrate that this formalism relates to a formal theory of questions (or ‘observables’ in the physicist’s jargon). This theory allows formulating attitude questions, which normally are non-commuting, i.e., the ordering of the questions affects the answer behavior of attitude questions. Further, it allows the expression of conditional questions such as “If Mary reads the book, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Steven E. Boër (1978). 'Who' and 'Whether': Towards a Theory of Indirect Question Clauses. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 2 (3):307 - 345.
    This paper shows in detail how the formal semiotic of M. J. Cresswell [6] may be extended to provide an account of indirect question clauses in English. The resulting account is compared at various points with the theory recently propounded by Karttunen [12] and is argued to have two major advantages over the latter in that (i) it accommodates the manifest teleological relativity of who-clauses, and (ii) it avoids the need for categorial segregation of sentence-taking verbs from wh-clause-taking verbs while (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. David Braun (2011). Implicating Questions. Mind and Language 26 (5):574-595.
    I modify Grice's theory of conversational implicature so as to accommodate acts of implicating propositions by asking questions, acts of implicating questions by asserting propositions, and acts of implicating questions by asking questions. I describe the relations between a declarative sentence's semantic content (the proposition it semantically expresses), on the one hand, and the propositions that a speaker locutes, asserts, and implicates by uttering that sentence, on the other. I discuss analogous relations between an interrogative sentence's semantic content (the question (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Berit Brogaard (2009). What Mary Did Yesterday: Reflections on Knowledge-Wh. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):439 - 467.
    Reductionists about knowledge-wh hold that "s knows-wh" (e.g. "John knows who stole his car") is reducible to "there is a proposition p such that s knows that p, and p answers the indirect question of the wh-clause." Anti-reductionists hold that "s knows-wh" is reducible to "s knows that p, as the true answer to the indirect question of the wh-clause." I argue that both of these positions are defective. I then offer a new analysis of knowledge-wh as a special kind (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Berit Brogaard (2009). What Mary Did Yesterday: Reflections on Knowledge-Wh. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):439 - 467.
    Reductionists about knowledge-wh hold that "s knows-wh" (e.g. "John knows who stole his car") is reducible to "there is a proposition p such that s knows that p, and p answers the indirect question of the wh-clause." Anti-reductionists hold that "s knows-wh" is reducible to "s knows that p, as the true answer to the indirect question of the wh-clause." I argue that both of these positions are defective. I then offer a new analysis of knowledge-wh as a special kind (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Sylvain Bromberger (1966). Questions. Journal of Philosophy 63 (20):597-606.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Ivano Caponigro & Kathryn Davidson (2011). Ask, and Tell as Well: Question–Answer Clauses in American Sign Language. Natural Language Semantics 19 (4):323-371.
    A construction is found in American Sign Language that we call a Question–Answer Clause. It is made of two parts: the first part looks like an interrogative clause conveying a question, while the second part resembles a declarative clause answering that question. The very same signer has to sign both, the entire construction is interpreted as truth-conditionally equivalent to a declarative sentence, and it can be uttered only under certain discourse conditions. These and other properties of Question–Answer Clauses are discussed, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Lucas Champollion, A Unified Account of Distributivity, for -Adverbials, and Pseudopartitives.
    This paper presents a diagnostic for identifying distributive constructions and shows that it applies to pseudopartitives and for -adverbials. On this basis, a unified account is proposed for the parallels between the constructions involved. This account explains why for -adverbials reject telic predicates (*run to the store for five hours), why pseudopartitives reject count nouns (*five pounds of book ), and why both reject certain measure functions like temperature and speed (*30 of water, *drive for 5 mph). These restrictions all (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Gennaro Chierchia (1993). Questions with Quantifiers. Natural Language Semantics 1 (2):181-234.
    This paper studies the distribution of ‘list readings’ in questions like who does everyone like? vs. who likes everyone?. More generally, it focuses on the interaction between wh-words and quantified NPs. It is argued that, contrary to widespread belief, the pattern of available readings of constituent questions can be explained as a consequence of Weak Crossover, a well-known property of grammar. In particular, list readings are claimed to be a special case of ‘functional readings’, rather than arising from quantifying into (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Charles B. Cross (1991). Explanation and the Theory of Questions. Erkenntnis 34 (2):237 - 260.
    In The Scientific Image B. C. van Fraassen argues that a theory of explanation ought to take the form of a theory of why-questions, and a theory of this form is what he provides. Van Fraassen's account of explanation is good, as far as it goes. In particular, van Fraassen's theory of why-questions adds considerable illumination to the problem of alternative explanations in psychodynamics. But van Fraassen's theory is incomplete because it ignores those classes of explanations that are answers not (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Veneeta Dayal, 44 Multiple-Wh-Questions.
    1.1 Wh-expressions as diagnostics of scope 1.1.1 Fronting and possible answers as indicators of scope 1.1.2 Constraints on Scope: ECP and Subjacency 1.1.3 Alternatives to Covert Movement 1.1.4 Overview of the chapter 1.2 Cross-linguistic variation in multiple-wh-questions 1.2.1 Non-fronting languages 1.2.2 Multiple-fronting languages 1.2.3 Languages without multiple-wh-questions 1.2.4 Optional-fronting languages 1.2.5 Explanations for typological variation 2 Superiority effects..
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Veneeta Dayal, Scope Marking: Cross-Linguistic Variation in Indirect.
    Overview A scope marking structure is characterized by the fact that it has two clauses, each of which contains wh expressions [CP-1...wh1...][CP-2...wh2(...whn)...]. While wh- 1 is a fixed lexical item, wh-2...wh-n are not. A possible answer to the question seems to specify values not for wh1 but for wh2...whn. In recent years such structures have come under a lot of scrutiny and various analyses have been proposed to account for their properties. In spite of differences in detail, these analyses can (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Paul Egré (2008). Question-Embedding and Factivity. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1):85-125.
    Attitude verbs fall in different categories depending on the kind of sentential complements which they can embed. In English, a verb like know takes both declarative and interrogative complements. By contrast, believe takes only declarative complements and wonder takes only interrogative complements. The present paper examines the hypothesis, originally put forward by Hintikka (1975), that the only verbs that can take both that -complements and whether -complements are the factive verbs. I argue that at least one half of the hypothesis (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Nomi Erteschik-Shir (1986). Wh-Questions and Focus. Linguistics and Philosophy 9 (2):117 - 149.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Kate Falkenstien (forthcoming). Explaining the Effect of Morality on Intentionality: The Role of Underlying Questions. Review of Philosophy and Psychology.
    People's moral judgments affect their judgments of intentionality for actions that succeeded by luck. This article aimed to explain that phenomenon by suggesting that people's judgments of intentionality are driven by the underlying questions they have considered. We examined two types of questions: questions about why people act, and questions about how they succeed in acting. In a series of experiments, we found that people prefer different questions for neutral and immoral actions (Studies 1 and 2) and that asking them (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Robert Fiengo (2007). Asking Questions: Using Meaningful Structures to Imply Ignorance. Oxford ;University Press.
    Ignorance and incompleteness -- The instrumental model of talking : how to talk about talk -- Open questions, confirmation questions, and how to choose -- Which sentence-type to use when asking them -- Quantifiers, wh-expressions, and manners of interpretation -- Syntactic structure -- On the questioning speech-acts and the kinds of ignorance they -- Address.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Ilaria Frana (2013). Quantified Concealed Questions. Natural Language Semantics 21 (2):179-218.
    This paper presents a novel treatment of quantified concealed questions , examining different types of NP predicates and deriving the truth conditions for pair-list and set readings. A generalization is proposed regarding the distribution of the two readings, namely that pair-list readings arise from CQs with relational head nouns, whereas set readings arise from CQs whose head nouns are not relational. It is shown that set readings cannot be derived under the ‘individual concept’ approach, one of the most influential analyses (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Amy Franklin & Anastasia Giannakidou (2011). Negation, Questions, and Structure Building in a Homesign System. Cognition 118 (3):398-416.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Jane Friedman (2013). Question‐Directed Attitudes. Philosophical Perspectives 27 (1):145-174.
    In this paper I argue that there is a class of attitudes that have questions (rather than propositions or something else) as contents.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Joseph S. Fulda (2010). The Logic of “Asked and Answered!”: The Case of the Traffic Light. Ratio Juris 23 (2):282-287.
    Uses erotetic logic to model the courtroom objection "Asked and Answered!".
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Joseph S. Fulda (2000). The Logic of “Improper Cross”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (4):337-341.
    Uses erotetic logic to model the courtroom objection "Improper Cross!". -/- Readers downloading the article should also please download the erratum et corrigendum, which is locally available.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. B. R. George (2013). Which Judgments Show Weak Exhaustivity? Natural Language Semantics 21 (4):401-427.
    This paper considers two of the most prominent kinds of evidence that have been used to argue that certain embedded questions receive weakly exhaustive interpretations. The first kind is exemplified by judgments of consistency for declarative sentences that attribute knowledge of a wh-question and ignorance of the negation of that question to the same person, and the second concerns asymmetries between the role of positive and negative information in validating question-embedding surprise ascriptions, and similar judgments for other attitudes. I argue (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Anastasia Giannakidou, Polarity, Questions, and the Scalar Properties of Even.
    This paper discusses the behavior of three lexically distinct Greek expressions which appear to be the counterparts of English even: akomi ke, oute, and esto. The behavior of these three expressions is examined in positive and negative sentences, and it is demonstrated that they all are polarity sensitive. The distributional constraints of the three even-items, crucially, are shown to follow from their distinct scalar associations. In particular, the low-scalar likelihood of positive even (akomi ke) remains problematic with negation as well (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. David Gil (1982). Quantifier Scope, Linguistic Variation, and Natural Language Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 5 (4):421 - 472.
  38. Jonathan Ginzburg (1995). Resolving Questions, I. Linguistics and Philosophy 18 (5):459 - 527.
    The paper is in two parts. In Part I, a semantics for embedded and query uses of interrogatives is put forward, couched within a situation semantics framework. Unlike many previous analyses,questions are not reductively analysed in terms of their answers. This enables us to provide a notion of ananswer that resolves a question which varies across contexts relative to parameters such as goals and inferential capabilities. In Part II of the paper, extensive motivation is provided for an ontology that distinguishes (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Jonathan Ginzburg (1995). Resolving Questions, II. Linguistics and Philosophy 18 (6):567 - 609.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Joroen Groenendijk & Martin Stokhof (1982). Semantic Analysis of Wh-Complements. Linguistics and Philosophy 5 (2):175 - 233.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Andrea Gualmini, Sarah Hulsey, Valentine Hacquard & Danny Fox (2008). The Question–Answer Requirement for Scope Assignment. Natural Language Semantics 16 (3):205-237.
    This paper focuses on children’s interpretation of sentences containing negation and a quantifier (e.g., The detective didn’t find some guys). Recent studies suggest that, although children are capable of accessing inverse scope interpretations of such sentences, they resort to surface scope to a larger extent than adults. To account for children’s behavioral pattern, we propose a new factor at play in Truth Value Judgment tasks: the Question–Answer Requirement (QAR). According to the QAR, children (and adults) must interpret the target sentence (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. C. L. Hamblin (1958). Questions. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36 (3):159 – 168.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Chung-Hye Han & Maribel Romero, Ellipsis and Movement in the Syntax of Whether/Q...Or Questions.
    In English, a non-wh-question may have a disjunctive phrase explicitly providing the choices that the question ranges over. For example, in (1), the disjunction or not indicates that the the choice is between the positive and the negative polarity for the relevant proposition, as spelled out in the yes/no (yn)-question reading (2) and in the answers (2a,b). Another example is (3). The disjunction in (3) can be understood as providing the choices that the question ranges over, hence giving rise to (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Michael Hand (1988). Game-Theoretical Semantics, Montague Semantics, and Questions. Synthese 74 (2):207 - 222.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Peter Hanks, Questions.
    All too often when philosophers talk and write about sentences they have in mind only indicative sentences, that is, sentences that are true or false and that are normally used in the performance of assertions. When interrogative sentences are mentioned at all it is usually either in the form of a gesture toward some extension of the account of indicatives or an acknowledgment of the limitations of such an account. For example, in the final two sentences of his influential paper (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Higginbotham, James & Robert May (1981). Questions, Quantifiers and Crossing. Linguistic Review 1:41--80.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jaakko Hintikka & Ilpo Halonen (1995). Semantics and Pragmatics for Why-Questions. Journal of Philosophy 92 (12):636-657.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Christopher Hookway (1997). Analyticity, Linguistic Rules and Epistemic Evaluation. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 42:197-.
  49. İlhan İnan (2012). The Philosophy of Curiosity. Routledge.
    Meno's paradox and inostensible conceptualization -- Asking and answering -- Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description -- Referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions -- De re/de dicto -- Rigidity and direct reference -- Reference to the object of curiosity -- Conditions for curiosity -- Conditions for the satisfaction of curiosity -- Relativity of curiosity and its satisfaction -- Presuppositions of curiosity -- Limits of curiosity and its satisfaction.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Ilhan Inan (2012). The Philosophy of Curiosity. Routledge.
    Meno's paradox and inostensible conceptualization -- Asking and answering -- Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description -- Referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions -- De re/de dicto -- Rigidity and direct reference -- Reference to the object of curiosity -- Conditions for curiosity -- Conditions for the satisfaction of curiosity -- Relativity of curiosity and its satisfaction -- Presuppositions of curiosity -- Limits of curiosity and its satisfaction.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 94