10 found
Sort by:
  1. Paul Elbourne, Seminar in Semantics: Complex Demonstratives.
    This seminar will investigate the semantics of complex demonstratives, that is phrases like that dog with a blue collar and this table where this or that is followed by an NP. There has been much debate recently on the overall semantic shape of these items, with some theorists (e.g. Braun) claiming that they are directly referential in the sense of Kaplan, some (e.g. King) claiming that they are quantificational, some (e.g. Roberts) claiming that they are to be treated as definites (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Paul Elbourne (2013). Definite Descriptions. Oup Oxford.
    Paul Elbourne defends the Fregean view that definite descriptions ('the table', 'the King of France') refer to individuals, and offers a new and radical account of the semantics of pronouns. He draws on a wide range of work, from Frege, Peano, and Russell to the latest findings in linguistics, philosophy of language, and psycholinguistics.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Paul Elbourne (2011). Meaning: A Slim Guide to Semantics. OUP Oxford.
    This book offers an introduction to the analysis of meaning. Our outstanding ability to communicate is a distinguishing feature of our species. To communicate is to convey meaning, but what is meaning? How do words combine to give us the meanings of sentences? And what makes a statement ambiguous or nonsensical? These questions and many others are addressed in Paul Elbourne's fascinating guide. He opens by asking what kinds of things the meanings of words and sentences could be: are they, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Paul Elbourne (2010). On Bishop Sentences. Natural Language Semantics 18 (1):65-78.
    This article offers a critical examination of Kroll’s (Natural Language Semantics 16: 359–372, 2008) arguments against Elbourne’s (Situations and individuals, 2005) treatment of bishop sentences.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Paul Elbourne (2010). The Existence Entailments of Definite Descriptions. Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (1):1-10.
    Contrary to a claim made by Kaplan (Mind 114:933–1003, 2005) and Neale (Mind 114:809–871, 2005), the readings available to sentences containing definite descriptions embedded under propositional attitude verbs and conditionals do pose a significant problem for the Russellian theory of definite descriptions. The Fregean theory of descriptions, on the other hand, deals easily with the relevant data.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Paul Elbourne (2010). Why Propositions Might Be Sets of Truth-Supporting Circumstances. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (1):101 - 111.
    Soames (Philos Top 15:44–87, 1987 , J Philos Logic 37:267–276, 2008 ) has argued that propositions cannot be sets of truth-supporting circumstances. This argument is criticized for assuming that various singular terms are directly referential when in fact there are good grounds to doubt this.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Paul Elbourne (2008). Demonstratives as Individual Concepts. Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (4):409-466.
    Using a version of situation semantics, this article argues that bare and complex demonstratives are interpreted as individual concepts.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Paul Elbourne (2008). The Argument From Binding. Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1):89-110.
    In some utterances, some material does not seem to be explicitly expressed in words, but nevertheless seems to be part of the literal content of the utterance rather than an implicature. I will call material of this kind implicit content. The following are some relevant examples from the literature. (1) Everyone was sick. (2) I haven’t eaten. (3) It’s raining. In the case of (1), we are supposed to have asked Stephen Neale how his dinner party went last night (Neale, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Paul Elbourne (2001). E-Type Anaphora as NP-Deletion. Natural Language Semantics 9 (3):241-288.
    This paper argues that donkey pronouns should be construed as definite articles, followed by an NP sister which has undergone deletion in the phonology. So Every man who owns a donkey beats it is claimed to share a Logical Form with Every man who owns a donkey beats the donkey, which means the same. There is independent evidence for assimilating pronouns to determiners, and for NP-deletion; so this theory explains E-type anaphora without postulating any special entity (`E-type pronoun') for the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Paul Elbourne & E. -Type Anaphora As Np-Deletion (2001). Manfred Krifka/Quantifying Into Question Acts Ariel Cohen/Relative Readings of Many, Often, and Generics Sigrid Beck/Reciprocals Are Definites Instructions for Authors. Natural Language Semantics 9 (413).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation