Graduate studies at Western
Mind and Language 16 (5):547–563 (2001)
|Abstract||Two semantic theories of proper names are explained and assessed. The theories are Burge’s treatment of proper names as complex demonstratives and Larson and Segal’s quasi-descriptivist account of names. The two theories are evaluated for empirical plausibility. Data from deficits, processing models, developmental studies and syntax are all discussed. It is concluded that neither theory is fully confirmed or refuted by the data, but that Larson and Segal’s theory has more empirical plausibility|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Delia Graff Fara (2011). You Can Call Me 'Stupid', ... Just Don't Call Me Stupid. Analysis 71 (3):492-501.
Michael McKinsey (2010). Understanding Proper Names. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (4):325-354.
Kai-Yan Chan & 陳啟恩, A Critique of Kripke's Theories of Proper Names and Names of Natural Kinds : An Application of the Later Wittgenstein's Methodology.
M. W. Pelczar (2001). Names as Tokens and Names as Tools. Synthese 128 (1-2):133 - 155.
Heidi Tiedke (2011). Proper Names and Their Fictional Uses. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (4):707 - 726.
Eros Corazza (2002). Description-Names. Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (4):313-325.
Eduardo García-Ramírez & Marilyn Shatz (2011). On Problems with Descriptivism: Psychological Assumptions and Empirical Evidence. Mind and Language 26 (1):53-77.
Ora Matushansky (2008). On the Linguistic Complexity of Proper Names. Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (5):573-627.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads40 ( #33,736 of 731,329 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 731,329 )
How can I increase my downloads?