David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 149 (3):355 - 366 (2010)
In the debate over what determines the reference of an indexical expression on a given occasion of use, we can distinguish between two generic positions. According to the first, the reference is determined by internal factors, such as the speaker’s intentions. According to the second, the reference is determined by external factors, like conventions or what a competent and attentive audience would take the reference to be. It has recently been argued that the first position is untenable, since there are cases of mismatch where the intuitively correct reference differs from the one that would be determined by the relevant internal factors. The aim of this paper is to show that, contrary to this line of argument, it is the proponent of the second position that should be worried, since this position yields counterintuitive consequences regarding communicative success in cases of mismatch.
|Keywords||Reference Indexicals Demonstratives Communication Intentions|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard K. Wettstein (eds.) (1989). Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press, Usa.
Gareth Evans (1982). Varieties of Reference. Oxford University Press.
W. V. Quine (1992). Pursuit of Truth. Harvard University Press.
Stefano Predelli (1998). I Am Not Here Now. Analysis 58 (2):107–115.
Christopher Gauker (2008). Zero Tolerance for Pragmatics. Synthese 165 (3):359–371.
Citations of this work BETA
Jonas Åkerman (2015). Indexicals and Reference‐Shifting: Towards a Pragmatic Approach. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (3).
Andrew Peet (2016). Testimony and the Epistemic Uncertainty of Interpretation. Philosophical Studies 173 (2):395-416.
Jonas Åkerman (2015). The Communication Desideratum and Theories of Indexical Reference. Mind and Language 30 (4):474–499.
Allyson Mount (2015). Character, Impropriety, and Success: A Unified Account of Indexicals. Mind and Language 30 (1):1-21.
Similar books and articles
H. G. Callaway (1982). Sense, Reference and Purported Reference. Logique Et Analyse 25 (March):93-103.
Kepa Korta (2011). Critical Pragmatics: An Inquiry Into Reference and Communication. Cambridge University Press.
Jonas Åkerman (2009). A Plea for Pragmatics. Synthese 170 (1):155 - 167.
Marga Reimer (1992). Three Views of Demonstrative Reference. Synthese 93 (3):373 - 402.
Kirk A. Ludwig (1993). Direct Reference in Thought and Speech. Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 26 (1):49-76.
Quentin Smith (1989). The Multiple Uses of Indexicals. Synthese 78 (2):167--191.
Eros Corazza (2002). Temporal Indexicals and Temporal Terms. Synthese 130 (3):441 - 460.
K. Romdenh-Romluc (2006). I. Philosophical Studies 128 (2):257 - 283.
Added to index2009-02-16
Total downloads116 ( #31,813 of 1,793,012 )
Recent downloads (6 months)30 ( #25,638 of 1,793,012 )
How can I increase my downloads?