Against structured referring expressions
Philosophical Studies 146 (1):49 - 74 (2009)
| Abstract | Following Neale, I call the notion that there can be no such thing as a structured referring expression ‘structure skepticism’. The specific aim of this paper is to defuse some putative counterexamples to structure skepticism. The general aim is to bolster the case in favor of the thesis that lack of structure—in a sense to be made precise—is essential to reference. | |||||||||
| 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: 5,631 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesRoger Wertheimer (1999). Quotation Apposition. Philosophical Quarterly 50 (197):514-519.
Daphna Heller, Kristen S. Gorman & Michael K. Tanenhaus (2012). To Name or to Describe: Shared Knowledge Affects Referential Form. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (2):290-305.
Richard Heck (2002). Do Demonstratives Have Senses? Philosophers' Imprint 2 (2):1-33.
Richard Coates (2009). A Strictly Millian Approach to the Definition of the Proper Name. Mind and Language 24 (4):433-444.
Albert Gatt & Kees van Deemter (2007). Lexical Choice and Conceptual Perspective in the Generation of Plural Referring Expressions. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16 (4).
David Braun (1994). Structured Characters and Complex Demonstratives. Philosophical Studies 74 (2):193--219.
Imtiaz H. Khan, Kees van Deemter & Graeme Ritchie (2011). Managing Ambiguity in Reference Generation: The Role of Surface Structure. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (2):211-231.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #160,171 of 548,973 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,973 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
