Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Presuppositions and Quantifier Domains

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I will argue for a new account of presuppositions which is based on double indexing as well as minimal representational contexts providing antecedent material for anaphoric presuppositions, rather than notions of context defined in terms of the interlocutors’ pragmatic presuppositions or the information accumulated from the preceding discourse. This account applies in particular to new phenomena concerning the presupposition of quantifier domains. But it is also intended to be an account of presuppositions in general. The account differs from the Satisfaction Theory and the Binding Theory of presuppositions in that it can be viewed as a conservative extension of traditional static semantics and in that it does not involve the notion of pragmatic presupposition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • J. Barwise R. Cooper (1981) ArticleTitle‘Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language’ Linguistics and Philosophy 4 159–219 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00350139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • M. Cresswell (1985) Structured Meanings: The Semantics of Propositional Attitudes MIT Press Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Diesing (1992) Indefinites MIT Press Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Enç (1991) ArticleTitle‘The Semantics of Specificity’ Linguistic Inquiry 22 1–55

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Fiengo R. May (1994) Indices and Identity MIT Press Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • K. Von Fintel S. Iatridou (2003) ArticleTitle‘Epistemic Containment’ Linguistics and Philosophy 34 IssueID2 173–198

    Google Scholar 

  • L.T.F. Gamut (1991) Logic, Language, and Meaning Vol 2 Chicago UP Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawron, M. and S. Peters: 1990, Quantification and Anaphora in Situation Semantics, CSLI Lecture Notes, Stanford.

  • Z. Gendler Szabo (2000) ArticleTitle‘Descriptions and Uniqueness’ Philosophical Studies 101 29–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, B.: 1995, Presupposing, Ph D dissertation, University of Stuttgart.

  • B. Geurts (1996) ArticleTitle‘Local Satisfaction Guaranteed A Presupposition Theory and Its Problems’. Linguistics and Philosophy 19 259–294

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Geurts (1998) ArticleTitle‘Presuppositions and Anaphors in Attitude Contexts’ Linguistics and Philosophy 21 545–601 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1005481821597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • B. Geurts R. Sandt Particlevan der (1999) ‘Domain Restriction’ P. Bosch R.A. Sandt Particlevan der (Eds) Focus: Linguistic, Cognitive, and Computational Perspectives Cambridge UP Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Groenendijk M. Stokhof F. Veltman (1995) ‘Coreference and Contextually Restricted Quantification’ M. Krifka (Eds) Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory DMML Publications Ithaca (NY)

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Heim (1982) The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases University of Massachusetts Amherst

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Heim (1983) ArticleTitle‘On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions’ In: Barlow M. et al (eds) Proceedings of the West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics 2 114–123

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Heim (1992) ArticleTitle‘Presupposition Projection and the Semantics of Attitude Reports’ Journal of Semantics 9 183–221

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Higginbotham (1987) ‘Indefiniteness and Predication’ A. ter Meulen E. Reuland (Eds) The (In)Definiteness Effect MIT Press Cambridge (Mass) 43–70

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Janssen (1984) ‘Individual Concepts are Useful’ F. Landman F. Veltman (Eds) Varieties of Formal Semantics Foris Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Jong Particlede (1987) ‘The Compositional Nature of Indefiniteness’ A. ter Meulen E. Reuland (Eds) The (In)Definiteness Effect MIT Press Cambridge (Mass) 270–285

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Kamp (1971) ArticleTitle‘Formal Properties of Now’ Theoria 40 76–119

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Kamp (1981) ‘A Theory of Truth and Representation’ J. Groenendijk (Eds) et al. Truth, Interpretation and Information Foris Dordrecht 1–43

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Kamp U. Reyle (1993) From Discourse to Logic Kluwer Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Kaplan (1977) ‘Demonstratives’ J. Almog (Eds) et al. Themes from Kaplan Oxford University Press Oxford 481–563

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Karttunen (1974) ArticleTitle‘Presupposition and Linguistic Context’ Theoretical Linguistics 1 181–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional Implicature’, In C.-K. Ohn et al. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Presuppositions, Vol. 11, Amsterdam, pp. 1–56.

  • R. Kayne (1995) The Asymmetry of Syntax MIT Press Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Keenan (1987) ‘One the Semantic Definition of ‘Indefinite NP’ A. ter Meulen E. Reuland (Eds) The (In)Definiteness Effect MIT Press Cambridge (Mass) 286–318

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Keenan (1996) ‘The Semantics of Determiners’ S. Lappin (Eds) Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell Cambridge (Mass) 41–64

    Google Scholar 

  • King, J.: 2001, ‘Structured Propositions’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

  • Kripke, S. (ms): ‘Presuppositions and Anaphora: Remarks on the Formulation of the Projection Problem’, Ms, Princeton University.

  • D. Lewis (1972) Counterfactuals Basil Blackwell Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis D. (1981). ‘Index, Content and Context’. In: S. Kanger and S. Oehman (eds.), Philosophy and Grammar, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 79–100, Reprinted in D. Lewis (1998): Papers in Philosophical Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

  • P. Ludlow S. Neale (1991) ArticleTitle‘Indefinite Descriptions A Defence of Russell’ Linguistics and Philosophy 14 IssueID2 171–202 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00627402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • G. Milsark (1977) ArticleTitle‘Towards an Explanation of Certain Peculiarities in the Existential Construction in English’ Linguistic Analysis 3 1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Moltmann (1995) ArticleTitle‘Exception Sentences and Polyadic Quantification’ Linguistics and Philosophy 18 223–280 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00985445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • F. Moltmann (1997) ArticleTitle‘Intensional Verbs and Quantifiers’ Natural Language Semantics 5 1–52 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1008245409172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • S. Neale (1990) Descriptions MIT Press Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Pesetsky (1987) ‘Wh in situ: Movement and Unselective Binding’ E. J. Reuland A. ter Meulen (Eds) The (In)Definiteness Effect MIT Press Cambridge (Mass) 98–129

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Recanati (1996) ArticleTitle‘Domains of Discourse’ Linguistics and Philosophy 19 445–475 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00632777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E.J. Reuland (1985) ‘Representation at Logical Form and the Definiteness Effect’ J. Guéron (Eds) et al. Grammatical Representation Foris Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • K. Safir (1987) ‘What explains the Definiteness Effect?’ E. J. Reuland A. ter Meulen (Eds) The (In)Definiteness Effect MIT Press Cambridge (Mass) 71–97

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Soames (1986) ArticleTitle‘Incomplete Definite Descriptions’ Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 27 349–375 Occurrence Handle10.1305/ndjfl/1093636680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • S. Soames (1987) ArticleTitle‘Direct Reference, Propositional Attitudes, and Semantic Content’ Philosophical Topics 15 47–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1989, ‘Presupposition’, In D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. IV, pp. 553–616.

  • R. Stalnaker (1970) ArticleTitle‘Pragmatics’ Synthese 22 272–289 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00413603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Stalnaker (1973) ArticleTitle‘Presuppositions’ Journal of Philosophical Logic 2 447–457 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00262951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Stalnaker (1979) ‘Assertion’ P. Cole (Eds) Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics Academic Press New York 315–332

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Stalnaker (1988) ‘Belief Attribution and Context’ R. Grimm R. Merrill (Eds) Contents and Thought University of Arizona Press Tucson 143–156

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Stanley (2002) ‘Nominal Restriction’ S. Peters (Eds) et al. Logical Form and Language Oxford UP Oxford 365–388

    Google Scholar 

  • P.F. Strawson (1950) ArticleTitle‘On Referring’ Mind 59 320–344

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Sandt Particlevan der (1992) ArticleTitle‘Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution’ Journal of Semantics 9 333–378

    Google Scholar 

  • J.-R. Vergnaud (1974) French Relative Clauses MIT Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Westerstahl (1984) ‘Determiners and Context Sets’ J.v. Benthem A. ter Meulen (Eds) Generalized Quantifiers in Natural Language Foris Dordrecht 45–71

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Zeevat (1997) ArticleTitle‘Presupposition and Accommodation in Update Semantics’ Journal of Semantics 9 379–412

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Zimmerman (1992) ArticleTitle‘On the Proper Treatment of Opacity in Certain Verbs’ Natural Language Semantics 1 IssueID2 149–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucchi, S.: 1995, ‘The Ingredients of Definiteness and the Indefiniteness Effect’, Natural Language Semantics 3(1).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (IHPST), 13 Rue du Four, 75006, Paris, France

    Friederike Moltmann

Authors
  1. Friederike Moltmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Friederike Moltmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moltmann, F. Presuppositions and Quantifier Domains. Synthese 149, 179–224 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-004-6254-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-004-6254-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation