34 found
Order:
See also:
Profile: Bart Geurts
  1. Bart Geurts (2002). Discussion Note: Bad News for Anyone?--A Reply to Abbott. Journal of Semantics 19 (2):203-207.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  10
    Bart Geurts (2010). Quantity Implicatures. Cambridge University Press.
    Gricean pragmatics. Saying vs. implicating ; Discourse and cooperation ; Conversational implicatures ; Generalised vs. particularised ; Cancellability ; Gricean reasoning and the pragmatics of what is said -- The standard recipe for Q-implicatures. The standard recipe ; Inference to the best explanation ; Weak implicatures and competence ; Relevance ; Conclusion -- Scalar implicatures. Horn scales and the generative view ; Implicatures and downward entailing environments ; Disjunction : exclusivity and ignorance ; Conclusion -- Psychological plausibility. Charges of psychological (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  3. Bart Geurts (1999). Presuppositions and Pronouns. Elsevier.
    In this volume, Geurts takes discourse representation theory (DRT), and turns it into a unified account of anaphora and presupposition, which he applies not only to the standard problem cases but also to the interpretation of modal expressions, attitude reports, and proper names. The resulting theory, for all its simplicity, is without doubt the most comprehensive of its kind to date. The central idea underlying Geurts' 'binding theory' of presupposition is that anaphora is just a special case of presupposition projection. (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   36 citations  
  4.  35
    Bart Geurts (1997). Good News About the Description Theory of Names. Journal of Semantics 14 (4):319-348.
    This is an attempt at reviving Kneale's version of the description theory of names, which says that a proper name is synonymous with a definite description of the form ‘the individual named so-and-so’. To begin with, I adduce a wide range of observations to show that names and overt definites are alike in all relevant respects. I then turn to Kripke's main objection against Kneale's proposal, and endeavour to refute it. In the remainder of the paper I elaborate on Kneale's (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  5.  20
    Bart Geurts (2005). Entertaining Alternatives: Disjunctions as Modals. Natural Language Semantics 13 (4):383-410.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   19 citations  
  6. Bart Geurts (2009). Scalar Implicature and Local Pragmatics. Mind and Language 24 (1):51-79.
    Abstract: The Gricean theory of conversational implicature has always been plagued by data suggesting that what would seem to be conversational inferences may occur within the scope of operators like believe , for example; which for bona fide implicatures should be an impossibility. Concentrating my attention on scalar implicatures, I argue that, for the most part, such observations can be accounted for within a Gricean framework, and without resorting to local pragmatic inferences of any kin d. However, there remains a (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  7.  77
    Bart Geurts (1996). Onno. Journal of Semantics 13:67-86.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  3
    Paula Rubio-Fernández & Bart Geurts (forthcoming). Don’T Mention the Marble! The Role of Attentional Processes in False-Belief Tasks. Review of Philosophy and Psychology:1-16.
    In the last 30 years, the key issue in developmental Theory of Mind has been if and when children are capable of representing false beliefs. Moving away from this research question, the aim of this study was to investigate the role of attentional processes in false-belief tasks. We focused on the design of the test phase and investigated two factors that may be critical for 3-year-old children’s success: the form of the wh-question and the salience of the target object. The (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9. Bart Geurts, On an Ambiguity in Quantified Conditionals.
    Conditional sentences with quantifying expressions are systematically ambigous. In one reading, the if -clause restricts the domain of the overt quantifier; in the other, the if -clause restricts the domain of a covert quantifier, which defaults to epistemic necessity. Although the ambiguity follows directly from the Lewis- Kratzer line on if, it is not generally acknowledged, which has led to pseudoproblems and spurious arguments.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  10.  48
    Bart Geurts (2003). Reasoning with Quantifiers. Cognition 86 (3):223--251.
    In the semantics of natural language, quantification may have received more attention than any other subject, and one of the main topics in psychological studies on deductive reasoning is syllogistic inference, which is just a restricted form of reasoning with quantifiers. But thus far the semantical and psychological enterprises have remained disconnected. This paper aims to show how our understanding of syllogistic reasoning may benefit from semantical research on quantification. I present a very simple logic that pivots on the monotonicity (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  11.  39
    Bart Geurts & Emar Maier (2005). Quotation in Context. In Philippe de Brabanter (ed.), Hybrid Quotations. John Benjamins 109-28.
    It appears that in mixed quotations like the following, the quoted expression is used and mentioned at the same time: (1) George says Tony is his ``bestest friend''. Most theories seek to account for this observation by assuming that mixed quotations operate at two levels of content at once. In contradistinction to such two-dimensional theories, we propose that quotation involves just a single level of content. Quotation always produces a change in meaning of the quoted expression, and if the quotation (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  12.  23
    Bart Geurts (2002). Donkey Business. Linguistics and Philosophy 25 (2):129-156.
    In this paper I present experimental data showing that the interpretation of donkey sentences is influenced by certain aspects of world knowledge that seem to elude introspective observation, which I try to explain by reference to a scale ranging from prototypical individuals (like children) to quite marginal ones (such as railway lines). This ontological cline interacts with the semantics of donkey sentences: as suggested already by the anecdotal data on which much of the literature is based, the effect of world (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  13.  46
    Bart Geurts (1998). Presuppositions and Anaphors in Attitude Contexts. Linguistics and Philosophy 21 (6):545-601.
    This paper consists of two main parts and a coda. In the first part I present the ''binding theory'' of presupposition projection, which is the framework that I adopt in this paper (Section 1.1). I outline the main problems that arise in the interplay between presuppositions and anaphors on the one hand and attitude reports on the other (Section 1.2), and discuss Heim''s theory of presuppositions in attitude contexts (Section 1.3).In the second part of the paper I present my own (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  14.  3
    Paula Rubio-Fernández, Bart Geurts & Chris Cummins (forthcoming). Is an Apple Like a Fruit? A Study on Comparison and Categorisation Statements. Review of Philosophy and Psychology:1-24.
    Categorisation models of metaphor interpretation are based on the premiss that categorisation statements and comparison statements are fundamentally different types of assertion. Against this assumption, we argue that the difference is merely a quantitative one: ‘x is a y’ unilaterally entails ‘x is like a y’, and therefore the latter is merely weaker than the former. Moreover, if ‘x is like a y’ licenses the inference that x is not a y, then that inference is a scalar implicature. We defend (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  36
    Bart Geurts (1996). Local Satisfaction Guaranteed: A Presupposition Theory and its Problems. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 19 (3):259 - 294.
  16.  6
    Bart Geurts & Paula Rubio‐Fernández (2015). Pragmatics and Processing. Ratio 28 (4):446-469.
    Gricean pragmatics has often been criticised for being implausible from a psychological point of view. This line of criticism is never backed up by empirical evidence, but more importantly, it ignores the fact that Grice never meant to advance a processing theory, in the first place. Taking our lead from Marr, we distinguish between two levels of explanation: at the W-level, we are concerned with what agents do and why; at the H-level, we ask how agents do whatever it is (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  11
    Bart Geurts & Bob van Tiel (2016). When “All the Five Circles” Are Four: New Exercises in Domain Restriction. Topoi 35 (1):109-122.
    The domain of a quantifier is determined by a variety of factors, which broadly speaking fall into two types. On the one hand, the context of utterance plays a role: if the focus of attention is on a particular collection of kangaroos, for example, then “Q kangaroos” is likely to range over the individuals in that set. On the other hand, the utterance itself will help to establish the quantificational domain, inter alia through presuppositions triggered within the sentence. In this (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  26
    Bart Geurts, Discourse Representation Theory. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19.  1
    Bart Geurts (1996). On No. Journal of Semantics 13 (1):67-86.
    Since Jacobs (1980) it has been generally assumed that German Kein ‘no’ requires a decompostitional analysis. On this analysis, Kein means ‘not some’, which in itself is plausible enough, but furthermore it is claimed that the negative element of kein may be construed as having scope over an expression that, in its turn, outscopes the quantifying element. 1 propose an alternative to this decompositional theory which explains the same range of data not in terms of scope, but in terms of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  20.  8
    Oesten Dahl, Mary Dalrymple, Paul Dekker, Josh Dever, Walter Edelberg, Kai von Fintel, Gilles Fauconnier, Nissim Francez, Peter Gärdenfors & Bart Geurts (1999). 680 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Fiona Cowie Max Cresswell Mark Crimmins. Linguistics and Philosophy 22:679-680.
  21.  3
    Bart Geurts (1997). Linda M. Moxey and Anthony J. Sanford: Communicating Quantities. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hove (UK)/Hillsdale (USA), 1993. Pp. Xii+ 144.£ 19.95/$37.50 (Hardback). [REVIEW] Journal of Semantics 14:87-94.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  4
    Bart Geurts (2003). Monotonicity and Syllogistic Inference: A Reply to Newstead. Cognition 90 (2):201-204.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  23.  12
    Bart Geurts (1985). Generics. Journal of Semantics 4 (3):247-255.
    There is a fairly general tendency to analyse generic statements as referring to the entities that are commonly identified as “kinds”. Apart from the fact that, thus far, none of these analyses have proven to be satisfactory, there always remains the problem of explaining what a kind is. I propose, instead, to do away with kinds altogether, and to regard generics as expressing stereotypical assumptions. Although, at the moment, I have just the broad outlines of a theory to offer, this (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24. Bart Geurts & Emar Maier, Layered DRT.
    The information conveyed by any utterance is a motley ensemble. Utterances carry content about the world as it is according to the speaker, but also about speakers’ attitudes, the way they speak, what has been said before, and so on. There are many kinds of information that are conveyed by way of language, and differences in kind correlate with differences in status. Presupposed information exhibits a distinctive projection behaviour; conversational implicatures are cancellable in a way that asserted information is not; (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  4
    Martina Faller, Hana Filip, Nissim Francez, Angela Friederici, Marc Gawron, Bart Geurts, Anastasia Giannakidou, Jonathan Ginzburg, Paul Gochet & D. Graff (2003). 782 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Veneeta Dayal Regine Eckardt Paul Elbourne. Linguistics and Philosophy 26:781-782.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Bart Geurts & Frans van der Slik (2005). Ups and Downs in Syllogistic Reasoning. Journal of Semantics 22:99-117.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  11
    Bart Geurts (2013). Alternatives in Framing and Decision Making. Mind and Language 28 (1):1-19.
    There is a wealth of experimental data showing that the way a problem is framed may have an effect on people's choices and decisions. Based on a semantic analysis of evaluative expressions like ‘good’, I propose a new explanation of such framing effects. The key idea is that our choices and decisions reveal a counterfactual systematicity: they carry information about the choices and decisions we would have made if the facts had been otherwise. It is these counterfactual alternatives that may (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Bart Geurts, Propositions and Rigidity in Layered Drt.
    • names and indexicals are directly referential/rigid designators • wide-scope behavior w.r.t. operators • not synonymous with the description giving their ‘descriptive meaning’, as shown by Kripke-Kaplan examples (1) and (2).
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Bart Geurts, Logical Reasoning.
    In the psychological literature on reasoning it has always been assumed that if there is such a thing as mental logic, it must be a set of inference rules. This proof-theoretic conception of mental logic is compatible with but doesn’t do justice to what, according to most logicians, logic is about. Thus, the ongoing debate over mental logic is based on a too narrow notion of logic. Adopting the broader perspective suggested by the standard (Tarskian) view on logic helps to (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  2
    Helen de Hoop, Paul Dekker, Donka Farkas, Ted Fernald, Tim Fernando, Bart Geurts, Jonathan Ginzburg, Brendan Gillon, Barbara Grosz & Pat Healey (2001). 790 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Ariel Cohen Ann Copestake Robert Cummins. Linguistics and Philosophy 24:789-790.
  31.  11
    Bart Geurts (2000). Stephen Crain & Rosalind Thornton, Investigations in Universal Gram-Mar: A Guide to Experiments on the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 23 (5):523-532.
  32. Bart Geurts, Unary Quantification Revisited.
    It is well known that most is not first-order definable, and that the proof is in Barwise and Cooper’s 1981 paper. Actually, Barwise and Cooper present two theorems that bear on the issue. Their theorem C12 says that, for any pair of one-place predicates A and B, there is no sentence of classical predicate logic that is true iff ‘Most A are B’ is. (I assume that ‘Most A are B’ means that more than half of the A’s are B, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Bart Geurts & Emar Maier (2013). Layered Discourse Representation Theory. In Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo & Marco Carapezza (eds.), Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics. Springer 311--327.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Rob Jenkins, A. Mike Burton, Andrew W. Ellis, Bart Geurts, Anna Papafragou & Julien Musolino (2003). Andrea L. patalano. Cognition 86:319-321.
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography