The Assertion-Candidate and the Meaning of Mood
Synthese 159 (1):61 - 82 (2007)
| Abstract | The meaning of a declarative sentence and that of an interrogative sentence differ in their aspect of mood. A semantics of mood has to account for the differences in meaning between these sentences, and it also has to explain that sentences in different moods may have a common core. The meaning of the declarative mood is to be explained not in terms of actual force (contra Dummett), but in terms of potential force. The meaning of the declarative sentence (including its mood) is called the assertion-candidate, which is explained by what one must know in order to be entitled to utter the declarative with assertive force. Both a cognitive notion (knowledge) and a pragmatic notion (assertive force) are thus part of the explanation of the assertion-candidate. Davidson's criticism that such a theory is in need of an account of the distinction between standard and non-standard uses of the declarative is answered: without counter-indications an utterance of a declarative sentence is understood as having assertive force. The meaning of an interrogative sentence, the question-candidate, and that of the other sentence types can ultimately be explained in terms of their specific relations to the assertion-candidate. Martin-Löf's constructive type theory is used to show the philosophical relevance of a semantics of mood. The constructivist notion of proposition needs to be embedded in a theory of the assertion-candidate, which fulfills the offices of being the meaning of the declarative sentence, the content of judgement and assertion and the bearer of epistemic truth. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesDeirdre Wilson & Dan Sperber (1988). Mood and the Analysis of Non-Declarative Sentences. In J. Dancy, J. M. E. Moravcsik & C. C. W. Taylor (eds.), Human Agency: Language, Duty, and Value. Stanford University Press.
Kari Middleton (2007). The Inconsistency of Deflationary Truth and Davidsonian Meaning. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:99-103.
Sanford Shieh (1998). On the Conceptual Foundations of Anti-Realism. Synthese 115 (1):33-70.
D. E. Over (1981). Game Theoretical Semantics and Entailment. Studia Logica 40 (1):67 - 74.
Markus Schrenk (2008). Verificationist Theory of Meaning. In U. Windhorst, M. Binder & N. Hirowaka (eds.), Encyclopaedic Reference of Neuroscience. Springer.
Maria Schaar (2011). Assertion and Grounding: A Theory of Assertion for Constructive Type Theory. Synthese 183 (2):187-210.
Henry S. Leonard (1959). Interrogatives, Imperatives, Truth, Falsity and Lies. Philosophy of Science 26 (3):172-186.
Mikhail Kissine (2011). Misleading Appearances: Searle on Assertion and Meaning. Erkenntnis 74 (1):115-129.
Robert J. Stainton (2006). Terminological Reflections of an Enlightened Contextualist. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):460–468.
Ian Proops (1997). The Early Wittgenstein on Logical Assertion. Philosophical Topics 25 (2):121-144.
Gabriel Nuchelmans (1994). Can a Mental Proposition Change its Truth‐Value? Some 17th-Century Views. History and Philosophy of Logic 15 (1):69-84.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-05-29Total downloads3 ( #201,730 of 548,979 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,979 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
