Search results for 'dynamic semantics' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
See also:
  1. Philippe Schlenker (2007). Anti-Dynamics: Presupposition Projection Without Dynamic Semantics. [REVIEW] Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16 (3):325--356.score: 90.0
    Heim 1983 suggested that the analysis of presupposition projection requires that the classical notion of meanings as truth conditions be replaced with a dynamic notion of meanings as Context Change Potentials. But as several researchers (including Heim herself) later noted, the dynamic framework is insufficiently predictive: although it allows one to state that, say, the dynamic effect of F and G is to first update a Context Set C with F and then with G (i.e., C[F and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Rick Nouwen (2007). On Dependent Pronouns and Dynamic Semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (2):123 - 154.score: 90.0
    Within natural language semantics, pronouns are often thought to correspond to variables whose values are contributed by contextual assignment functions. This paper concerns the application of this idea to cases where the antecedent of a pronoun is a plural quantifiers. The paper discusses the modelling of accessibility patterns of quantifier antecedents in a dynamic theory of interpretation. The goal is to reach a semantics of quantificational dependency which yields a fully semantic notion of pronominal accessibility. I argue (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Peter Beim Graben (2014). Order Effects in Dynamic Semantics. Topics in Cognitive Science 6 (1):67-73.score: 90.0
    In their target article, Wang and Busemeyer (2013) discuss question order effects in terms of incompatible projectors on a Hilbert space. In a similar vein, Blutner recently presented an orthoalgebraic query language essentially relying on dynamic update semantics. Here, I shall comment on some interesting analogies between the different variants of dynamic semantics and generalized quantum theory to illustrate other kinds of order effects in human cognition, such as belief revision, the resolution of anaphors, and default (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. C. F. M. Vermeulen (1993). Sequence Semantics for Dynamic Predicate Logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 2 (3):217-254.score: 81.0
    In this paper a semantics for dynamic predicate logic is developed that uses sequence valued assignments. This semantics is compared with the usual relational semantics for dynamic predicate logic: it is shown that the most important intuitions of the usual semantics are preserved. Then it is shown that the refined semantics reflects out intuitions about information growth. Some other issues in dynamic semantics are formulated and discussed in terms of the new (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Tim Fernando (2001). A Type Reduction From Proof-Conditional to Dynamic Semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (2):121-153.score: 78.0
    Dynamic and proof-conditional approaches to discourse (exemplified by Discourse Representation Theory and Type-Theoretical Grammar, respectively) are related through translations and transitions labeled by first-order formulas with anaphoric twists. Type-theoretic contexts are defined relative to a signature and instantiated modeltheoretically, subject to change.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Albert Visser (2002). The Donkey and the Monoid. Dynamic Semantics with Control Elements. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (1):107-131.score: 72.0
    Dynamic Predicate Logic (DPL) is a variant of Predicate Logic introduced by Groenendijk and Stokhof. One rationale behind the introduction of DPL is that it is closer to Natural Language than ordinary Predicate Logic in the way it treats scope. In this paper I develop some variants of DPL that can more easily approximate Natural Language in some further aspects. Specifically I add flexibility in the treatment of polarity and and some further flexibility in the treatment of scope.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Daniel Rothschild (2011). Explaining Presupposition Projection with Dynamic Semantics. Semantics and Pragmatics 4 (3):1-43.score: 63.0
    Presents a version of dynamic semantics for a language with presuppositions that predicts basic facts about presupposition projection in a non-stipulative way.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Christopher Gauker, Comments on Dynamic Semantics.score: 60.0
    This is the text of my comments on the project of dynamic semantics for the session on that topic at the Central Division APA meeting on April 21, 2007. The other speakers were Jeroen Groenendijk, Frank Veltman and Thony Gillies. I question the philosophical basis for dynamic semantics. My doubts have to do with the nature of information states and the norms of semantics. I also question the data that inspire the project. In particular, I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Lenny Clapp (2009). The Problem of Negative Existentials Does Not Exist: A Case for Dynamic Semantics. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (7):1422-1434.score: 60.0
    The problem of negative existentials arises because utterances of such sentences have the paradoxical feature of denying what they presuppose, thus undermining their own truth. There are only two general strategies for solving the problem within the constraints traditional static semantics, and both strategies attempt to explain away this paradoxical feature. I argue that both strategies are fundamentally flawed, and that an adequate account of negative existentials must countenance, and not explain away, this paradoxical feature. Moreover, I argue that (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Martin Stokhof, Changing the Context. Dynamic Semantics and Discourse.score: 60.0
    This paper is an informal introduction to some aspects of dynamic semantics. It is a compilation of earlier reports on joint work with Frank Veltman. The opening section can also be found in Groenendijk et al. 1996a. Section 3 is drawn from Groenendijk et al. 1995a. Some of the discussion in section 4 derives from Groenendijk et al. 1996c.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Alice G. B. ter Meulen (1998). Semantic Realism, Rigid Designation, and Dynamic Semantics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):85-86.score: 60.0
    Semantic realism fits Millikan's account of kind terms in its focus on information-theoretic abilities and strategic ways of gathering information in human communication. Instead of the traditional logical necessity, we should interpret rigid designation in a dynamic semantics as a legislative act to constrain possible ways in which our belief may change.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Peter beim Graben (2006). Pragmatic Information in Dynamic Semantics. Mind and Matter 4 (2):169-193.score: 60.0
    In 1972,Ernst Ulrich and Christine von Weizs ¨acker introduced the concept of pragmatic information with three desiderata:(i) Pragmatic information should assess the impact of a message upon its receiver;(ii)Pragmatic information should vanish in the limits of complete (non-interpretable)'novelty 'and complete 'confirmation';(iii)Pragmatic information should exhibit non-classical properties since novelty and confirmation behave similarly to Fourier pairs of complementary operators in quantum mechanics. It will be shown how these three desiderata can be naturally fulfilled within the framework of Gardenfors' dynamic (...) of Bayesian belief models.(i)The meaning of a message is its impact upon the epistemic states of a cognitive agent. A pragmatic information measure can then be quanti .ed by the average information gain for the transition from a prior to a posterior state.(ii)Total novelty can be represented by the identical proposition, total con- .rmation by the logical consequence of propositions. In both cases, pragmatic information vanishes.(iii)For operators that are neither idempotent nor commuting, novelty and confirmation relative to a message sequence can be defined within Gardenfors' theory of belief revisions.The proposed approach is consistent with measures of relevance derived from statistical decision theory and it contains Bar-Hillel 's and Carnap's theory of semantic information as a special case. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Robert Van Rooy (2001). Exhaustivity in Dynamic Semantics; Referential and Descriptive Pronouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 24 (5):621-657.score: 60.0
    In this paper I argue that anaphoric pronouns should always be interpreted exhaustively. I propose that pronouns are either used referentially and refer to the speaker's referents of their antecedent indefinites, or descriptively and go proxy for the description recoverable from its antecedent clause. I show how this view can be implemented within a dynamic semantics, and how it can account for various examples that seemed to be problematic for the view that for all unbound pronouns there always (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Robert Van Rooy (2001). Exhaustivity in Dynamic Semantics; Referential and Descriptive Pronouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 24 (5):621 - 657.score: 60.0
    In this paper I argue that anaphoric pronouns should always be interpreted exhaustively. I propose that pronouns are either used referentially and refer to the speaker's referents of their antecedent indefinites, or descriptively and go proxy for the description recoverable from its antecedent clause. I show how this view can be implemented within a dynamic semantics, and how it can account for various examples that seemed to be problematic for the view that for all unbound pronouns there always (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alice G. B. ter Meulen (1998). Semantic Realism, Rigid Designation, and Dynamic Semantics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):85-86.score: 60.0
    Semantic realism fits Millikan's account of kind terms in its focus on information-theoretic abilities and strategic ways of gathering information in human communication. Instead of the traditional logical necessity, we should interpret rigid designation in a dynamic semantics as a legislative act to constrain possible ways in which our belief may change.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Anders Johan Schoubye (2013). Ghosts, Murderers, and the Semantics of Descriptions. Noûs 47 (3):496-533.score: 54.0
    It is widely agreed that sentences containing a non-denoting description embedded in the scope of a propositional attitude verb have true de dicto interpretations, and Russell's (1905) analysis of definite descriptions is often praised for its simple analysis of such cases, cf. e.g. Neale (1990). However, several people, incl. Elbourne (2005, 2009), Heim (1991), and Kripke (2005), have contested this by arguing that Russell's analysis yields incorrect predictions in non-doxastic attitude contexts. Heim and Elbourne have subsequently argued that once certain (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Dag Trygve Truslew Haug (2013). Partial Dynamic Semantics for Anaphora: Compositionality Without Syntactic Coindexation. Journal of Semantics:fft008.score: 54.0
    This article points out problems in current dynamic treatments of anaphora and provides a new account that solves these by grafting Muskens' Compositional Discourse Representation Theory onto a partial theory of types. Partiality is exploited to keep track of which discourse referents have been introduced in the text (thus avoiding the overwrite problem) and to account for cases of anaphoric failure. Another key assumption is that the set of discourse referents is well-ordered, so that we can keep track of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Mark Schroeder, Is Semantics Formal?score: 51.0
    In this paper I will be concerned with the question of the extent to which semantics can be thought of as a purely formal exercise, which we can engage in in a way that is neutral with respect to how our formal system is to be interpreted. I will be arguing, to the contrary, that the features of the formal systems which we use to do semantics are closely linked, in several different ways, to the interpretation that we (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Berit Brogaard (2012). Context and Content: Pragmatics in Two-Dimensional Semantics. In Keith Allan & Kasia Jaszczolt (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.score: 51.0
    Context figures in the interpretation of utterances in many different ways. In the tradition of possible-worlds semantics, the seminal account of context-sensitive expressions such as indexicals and demonstratives is that of Kaplan's two-dimensional semantics (the content- character distinction), further pursued in various directions by Stalnaker, Chalmers, and others. This chapter introduces and assesses the notion of context-sensitivity presented in this group of approaches, with a special focus on how it relates to the notion of cognitive significance and whether (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. R. Naumann (2001). Aspects of Changes: A Dynamic Event Semantics. Journal of Semantics 18 (1):27-81.score: 51.0
    In this paper Dynamic Event Semantics, DES, is presented. DES is based on the intuition that non-stative verbs express changes. The notion of change can be made precise in at least two different, yet complementary ways. It is either an object (event, action) or a transformation of state: a state s at which a result Q does not hold is transformed into a state s′ at which Q holds. An event can bring about more than one result. Each (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. R. Naumann (2003). Constraining the Combinatorial Patterns of Japanese V-V Compounds: An Analysis in Dynamic Event Semantics. Journal of Semantics 20 (3):275-296.score: 51.0
    In this article we investigate the argument structure of Japanese V–V compounds from the perspective of Dynamic Event Semantics (Naumann 2001). The argument structure of a verb is defined as a linearly ordered set of so‐called dynamic roles. Dynamic roles differ from thematic relations in characterizing participants in terms of sets of results that are brought about in the course of an event. The patterns of argument sharing found in Japanese V–V compounds are shown to derive (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. J. Peregrin & K. von Heusinger, Dynamic Semantics with Choice Functions.score: 51.0
    Over the last two decades, semantic theory has been marked by a continuing shift from a static view of meaning to a dynamic one. The increasing interest in extending semantic analysis from isolated sentences to larger units of discourse has fostered the intensive study of anaphora and coreference, and this has engendered a shift from viewing meaning as truth conditions to viewing it as the potential to change the "informational context".
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Bernhard Nickel (2013). Dynamics, Brandom-Style. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):333-354.score: 48.0
    Abstract This paper discusses the semantic theory presented in Robert Brandom’s Making It Explicit . I argue that it is best understood as a special version of dynamic semantics, so that these semantics by themselves offer an interesting theoretical alternative to more standard truth-conditional theories. This reorientation also has implications for more foundational issues. I argue that it gives us the resources for a renewed argument for the normativity of meaning. The paper ends by critically assessing the (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Josh Dever, Three Modes of, and Five Morals Regarding, Displaced Semantic Processing, with Special Attention to the Role of Variables (and a Final Plug for Dynamic Semantics).score: 48.0
    There is a puzzle regarding the semantics of quantification that is well-known among linguists and formal semanticists, but which has received relatively little attention from philosophers. The puzzle emerges most naturally if our semantic theory is categorical, satisfying two mutually supporting requirements.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. José Júlio Alferes, Federico Banti, Antonio Brogi & João Alexandre Leite (2005). The Refined Extension Principle for Semantics of Dynamic Logic Programming. Studia Logica 79 (1):7 - 32.score: 48.0
    Over recent years, various semantics have been proposed for dealing with updates in the setting of logic programs. The availability of different semantics naturally raises the question of which are most adequate to model updates. A systematic approach to face this question is to identify general principles against which such semantics could be evaluated. In this paper we motivate and introduce a new such principle the refined extension principle. Such principle is complied with by the stable model (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Jan Eijck & Fer-Jan Vries (1992). Dynamic Interpretation and HOARE Deduction. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 1 (1):1-44.score: 48.0
    In this paper we present a dynamic assignment language which extends the dynamic predicate logic of Groenendijk and Stokhof [1991: 39–100] with assignment and with generalized quantifiers. The use of this dynamic assignment language for natural language analysis, along the lines of o.c. and [Barwise, 1987: 1–29], is demonstrated by examples. We show that our representation language permits us to treat a wide variety of donkey sentences: conditionals with a donkey pronoun in their consequent and quantified sentences (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. S. J. Barker (1997). E-Type Pronouns, DRT, Dynamic Semantics and the Quantifier/Variable-Binding Model. Linguistics and Philosophy 20 (2):195-228.score: 45.0
  28. Paul Dekker (1996). The Values of Variables in Dynamic Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 19 (3):211 - 257.score: 45.0
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Paul Gochet Et Eric Gillet (1999). Quantified Modal Logic, Dynamic Semantics and S 5. Dialectica 53 (3-4):243–251.score: 45.0
  30. Willem Groeneveld (1994). Dynamic Semantics and Circular Propositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (3):267 - 306.score: 45.0
  31. C. F. M. Vermeulen (2000). Variables as Stacks. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (2):143-167.score: 45.0
    The development of the dynamic semantics of natural languagehas put issues of variable control on the agenda of formal semantics. Inthis paper we regard variables as names for stacks of values and makeexplicit several control actions as push and pop actions on stacks. Weapply this idea both to static and dynamic languages and compare theirfinite variable hierarchies, i.e., the relation between the number ofvariable stacks that is available and the expressivity of the language.This can be compared (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Yde Venema (1997). Editorial: Modal Logic and Dynamic Semantics. [REVIEW] Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6 (4):357-360.score: 45.0
  33. Dylan Bumford & Chris Barker (2013). Association with Distributivity and the Problem of Multiple Antecedents for Singular Different. Linguistics and Philosophy 36 (5):355-369.score: 45.0
    Brasoveanu (Linguist Philos 34:93–168, 2011) argues that “different” exhibits what he calls association with distributivity: a distributive operator such as “each” creates a two-part context that propagates through the compositional semantics in a way that can be accessed by a subordinate “different”. We show that Brasoveanu’s analysis systematically undergenerates, failing to provide interpretations of sentences such as “Every1 boy claimed every girl read a different1 poem”, in which “different” can associate with a non-local distributive operator. We provide a generalized (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Alexandru Baltag & Sonja Smets (2011). Quantum Logic as a Dynamic Logic. Synthese 179 (2):285 - 306.score: 45.0
    We address the old question whether a logical understanding of Quantum Mechanics requires abandoning some of the principles of classical logic. Against Putnam and others (Among whom we may count or not E. W. Beth, depending on how we interpret some of his statements), our answer is a clear "no". Philosophically, our argument is based on combining a formal semantic approach, in the spirit of E. W. Beth's proposal of applying Tarski's semantical methods to the analysis of physical theories, with (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Diderik Batens (1998). A Dynamic Semantics for Inconsistency-Adaptive Logics. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 27 (15-8):5l.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Ágnes Bende-Farkas (2007). Resultatives and Dynamic Semantics. In Dekker Aloni (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Amsterdam Colloquium.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Richard Breheny (2004). Indefinites and Anaphoric Independence: A Case for Dynamic Semantics and Pragmatics? In Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.), Descriptions and Beyond. Clarendon Press.score: 45.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Ivano A. Ciardelli & Floris Roelofsen (forthcoming). Inquisitive Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Synthese:1-45.score: 45.0
    Information exchange can be seen as a dynamic process of raising and resolving issues. The goal of this paper is to provide a logical framework to model and reason about this process. We develop an inquisitive dynamic epistemic logic (IDEL), which enriches the standard framework of dynamic epistemic logic (DEL), incorporating insights from recent work on inquisitive semantics. At a static level, IDEL does not only allow us to model the information available to a set of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Paul Dekker (2004). Grounding Dynamic Semantics. In Anne Bezuidenhout & Marga Reimer (eds.), Descriptions and Beyond. Oxford University Press.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Joeri Engelfriet, Catholijn M. Jonker & Jan Treur (2002). Antonio Moreno-Sandoval and José Miguel Goñi-Menoyo/Spanish Inflectional Morphology in Datr 79–105 Albert Visser/the Donkey and the Monoid. Dynamic Semantics with Control Elements 107–131 Instructions for Authors 133–139. [REVIEW] Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11:521-522.score: 45.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Paul Gochet & Eric Gillet (1999). Quantified Modal Logic, Dynamic Semantics and S 5. Dialectica 53 (3‐4):243-251.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Marcus Kracht (2002). Referent Systems and Relational Grammar. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (2):251-286.score: 45.0
    Relational Grammar (RG) was introduced in the 1970s as a theory of grammatical relations and relation change, for example, passivization, dative shift, and raising. Furthermore, the idea behind RG was that transformations as originally designed in generative grammar were unable to capture the common kernel of, e.g., passivization across languages. The researchconducted within RG has uncovered a wealth of phenomena for which it could produce a satisfactory analysis. Although the theory of Government and Binding has answered some of the complaints, (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Yasuo Nakayama (1999). Mereological Ontology and Dynamic Semantics. Annals of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science 9 (4):29-42.score: 45.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Norihiro Ogata (2008). Dynamic Semantics of Quantified Modal Mu-Calculi and Its Applications to Modelling Public Referents, Speaker's Referents, and Semantic Referents. In. In Satoh (ed.), New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. Springer. 109--122.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Craige Roberts (1995). Domain Restriction in Dynamic Semantics. In. In Emmon Bach, Eloise Jelinek, Angelika Kratzer & Barbara Partee (eds.), Quantification in Natural Languages. Kluwer. 661--700.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Akihiro Yoshimitsu (2004). A Dynamic Semantics for Vague Predicates. Annals of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science 12 (2):109-128.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Sarah Moss (2012). On the Pragmatics of Counterfactuals. Noûs 46 (3):561-586.score: 43.0
    Recently, von Fintel (2001) and Gillies (2007) have argued that certain sequences of counterfactuals, namely reverse Sobel sequences, should motivate us to abandon standard truth conditional theories of counterfactuals for dynamic semantic theories. I argue that we can give a pragmatic account of our judgments about counterfactuals without giving up the standard semantics. In particular, I introduce a pragmatic principle governing assertability, and I use this principle to explain a variety of subtle data concerning reverse Sobel sequences.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. William B. Starr, A Preference Semantics for Imperatives.score: 42.0
    There is a rich canon of work on the meaning of imperative sentences, e.g. "Dance!", in philosophy and much recent research in linguistics has made its own exciting advances. However, in this paper I argue that three observations about English imperatives are problematic for approaches from both traditions. In response, I offer a new analysis according to which the meaning of an imperative is identified with the characteristic effect its uses have on the agents’ attitudes. More specifically: an imperative’s meaning (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. William B. Starr (2013). A Uniform Theory of Conditionals. Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-46.score: 42.0
    A uniform theory of conditionals is one which compositionally captures the behavior of both indicative and subjunctive conditionals without positing ambiguities. This paper raises new problems for the closest thing to a uniform analysis in the literature (Stalnaker, Philosophia, 5, 269–286 (1975)) and develops a new theory which solves them. I also show that this new analysis provides an improved treatment of three phenomena (the import-export equivalence, reverse Sobel-sequences and disjunctive antecedents). While these results concern central issues in the study (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Eric McCready (2008). What Man Does. Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (6):671-724.score: 42.0
    This paper considers the meaning and use of the English particle man . It is shown that the particle does quite different things when it appears in sentence-initial and sentence-final position; the first use involves expression of an emotional attitude as well as, on a particular intonation, intensification; this use is analyzed using a semantics for degree predicates along with a separate dimension for the expressive aspect. Further restrictions on modification with the sentence-initial particle involving monotonicity and evidence are (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000