Geach's categorial grammar
Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (3):281 - 317 (2005)
| Abstract | Geach’s rich paper ‘A Program for Syntax’ introduced many ideas into the arena of categorial grammar, not all of which have been given the attention they warrant in the thirty years since its first publication. Rather surprisingly, one of our findings (Section 3 below) is that the paper not only does not contain a statement of what has widely come to be known as “Geach’s Rule”, but in fact presents considerations which are inimical to the adoption of the rule in question. With regard to at least some amongst the numerous other points extracted here from Geach’s discussion, we shall not be able to reach so definitive a conclusion, and content ourselves with giving the issues an airing. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesMichael Blome-Tillmann (2009). Non-Cognitivism and the Grammar of Morality. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 109 (1pt3):279-309.
Mark Schroeder (2008). What is the Frege-Geach Problem? Philosophy Compass 3 (4):703-720.
Charles Sayward (2002). Geach on Generalization. Dialogue 41 (02):221-.
Aravind K. Joshi & Seth Kulick (1997). Partial Proof Trees as Building Blocks for a Categorial Grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 20 (6):637-667.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads14 ( #84,198 of 556,807 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,807 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
