David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Semantics 27 (1):ffp012 (2010)
Semantic theories that violate semantic innocence, i.e. require reference-shifts when terms are embedded in ‘that’ clauses and the like, are often challenged by producing sentences where an anaphoric expression, while not itself embedded in a context in which reference shifts, is anaphoric on an antecedent expression that is embedded in such a context. This, in conjunction with a widely accepted principle concerning unproblematic anaphora, is used to show that such reference shifting has absurd consequences. We show that it is the widely accepted principle concerning anaphora that is to be blamed for these consequences, and not the supposed sin of reference shifting.
|Keywords||Anaphora Semantic Innocence Reference|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Antonio Rauti (2012). Multiple Groundings and Deference. Philosophical Quarterly 62 (247):317-336.
Craige Roberts (1997). Anaphora in Intensional Contexts. In Shalom Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell. 215--246.
Reinhard Muskens (2011). A Squib on Anaphora and Coindexing. Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (1):85-89.
Hub Prüst, Remko Scha & Martin Berg (1994). Discourse Grammar and Verb Phrase Anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 17 (3):261 - 327.
Maria Bittner (2011). Time and Modality Without Tenses or Modals. In Renate Musan & Monika Rathert (eds.), Tense across Languages. Niemeyer. 147--188.
J. P. Smit & A. Steglich-Petersen (2010). Anaphora and Semantic Innocence. Journal of Semantics 27 (1):119-124.
Added to index2009-09-30
Total downloads57 ( #22,195 of 1,004,658 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,617 of 1,004,658 )
How can I increase my downloads?