Philosophy 74 (3):439-440 (1999)
|Abstract||There are enormous differences between quantifying name-variables only, quantifying verb-variables only, and quantifying both. These differences are found only in the logic of polyadic predication; and this presumably is why Richard Gaskin thinks that they distinguish names from transitive verbs only, and not from verbs generally. But that thought is mistaken: these differences also distinguish names from intransitive verbs. They thus vindicate the common idea that on the difference between names and verbs we may base grandiose metaphysical distinctions, and undermine Gaskin's idea that both names and verbs may be said to designate objects.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Anna Szabolcsi (forthcoming). Certain Verbs Are Syntactically Explicit Quantifiers. In Skilters Jurgis & Partee Barbara (eds.), Baltic International Yearbook, Vol. 6. (2011). U of Riga, Latvia.
Maria Bittner & Naja Trondhjem (2008). Quantification as Reference: Evidence From Q-Verbs. In Lisa Matthewson (ed.), Quantification: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Emerald.
Paul Egré (2008). Question-Embedding and Factivity. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1):85-125.
Takashi Yagisawa (2001). Partee Verbs. Philosophical Studies 103 (3):253 - 270.
Nicholas Denyer (1998). Names, Verbs and Quantification. Philosophy 73 (286):619 - 623.
Nicholas Denyer (1998). Names, Verbs and Sentences. Philosophy 73 (4):619-623.
Richard Gaskin (1998). Predication and Ontology: Reply to Denyer. Philosophy 73 (4):624-628.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #114,063 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?