Abstract
In this paper, a pragmatic approach to the phenomenon of free choice permission is proposed. Free choice permission is explained as due to taking the speaker (i) to obey certain Gricean maxims of conversation and (ii) to be competent on the deontic options, i.e. to know the valid obligations and permissions. The approach differs from other pragmatic approaches to free choice permission in giving a formally precise description of the class of inferences that can be derived based on these two assumptions. This formalization builds on work of Halpern and Moses (1984) on the concept of ‘only knowing’, generalized by Hoek et al., (1999, 2000), and Zimmermann’s (2000) approach to competence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alonso-Ovalle, L.: 2004, Equal rights for every disjunct! Quantification over alternatives or pointwise context chance?, handout, Sinn und Bedeutung 9, Nijmegen
P. Blackburn et al. (2001) Modal Logic Cambridge University Press Cambridge
G. Forbes (2003) ArticleTitleMeaning-postulates, inference, and the relation/notional ambiguity Facta Philosophica 5 49–74
G. Gazdar (1979) Pragmatics Academic Press London
Geurts, B.:(to appear), Entertaining alternatives, Natural Language Semantics
P. Grice (1989) Studies in the Way of Words Harvard University Press Cambridge
Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1984, Studies in the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers, Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam
J.Y. Halpern Y. Moses (1984) Towards a theory of knowledge and ignorance American Association for Artificial Intelligence New Paltz NY 165–193
Hirschberg, J.: 1985, A Theory of Scalar Implicature, Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania
W. Hoek der van et al. (1999) ArticleTitlePersistence and minimality in epistemic logic Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 27 25–47
W. Hoek der van et al. (2000) A General Approach to Multi-Agent Minimal Knowledge M. Ojeda-Aciego I. P. Guzman G. Brewka L. M. Pereira (Eds) Proceedings JELLIA 2000. LNAI 1919 Springer Verlag Heidelberg 254–268
Horn, L.: 1972, The Semantics of Logical Operators in English, Ph.D. thesis, Yale University
L. Horn (1989) A Natural History of Negation University of Chicago Press Chicago
Kamp, H.: 1973, Free choice permission, in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, N. S. 74, 57–74
H. Kamp (1979) Semantics versus Pragmatics F. Guenther S.J. Schmidt (Eds) Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Natural Languages Reidel Dordrecht 255–287
D. Lewis (1970) A problem about permission Saarinen (Eds) et al. Essays in Honor of Jaakko Hintikka Reidel Dordrecht 163–175
A. Merin (1992) ArticleTitlePermission Sentences stand in the Way of Boolean and other Lattice Theoretic Semantics Journal of Semantics 9 95–152
R. Rooy Particlevan (2000) ArticleTitlePermission to Change Journal of Semantics 17 119–145
R. Rooy Particlevan K. Schulz (2004) ArticleTitleExhaustive Interpretation of Complex Sentences Journal of Logic, Language, and Computation 13 491–519
Schulz, K.: 2004, You May Read it Now or Later: A Case Study on the Paradox of Free Choice Permission, master thesis, University of Amsterdam
S. Soames (1982) ArticleTitleHow presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem Linguistic Inquiry 13 483–545
Wright, G. H. von: 1969, An Essay on Deontic Logic and the Theory of Action, Amsterdam
T. E. Zimmermann (2000) ArticleTitleFree choice disjunction and epistemic possibility Natural Language Semantics 8 255–290 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1011255819284
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schulz, K. A Pragmatic Solution for the Paradox of Free Choice Permission. Synthese 147, 343–377 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-1353-y
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-1353-y