Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are General Terms Rigid?

  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of California, 5631 South Hall, Santa Barbara, CA, 93106-3090, USA

    Nathan Salmon

Authors
  1. Nathan Salmon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan Salmon.

Additional information

The present article was presented to the interdisciplinary Princeton Workshop on Semantics in May 2003, where Robert May was commentator. I am grateful to May and the other discussants for their reactions, especially Scott Soames. I am also grateful to May for subsequent correspondence. I respond below to what I take to be his central criticisms. The reader is hereby cautioned, however, that I do not know the extent to which those criticisms represent his current thinking. Thanks go also to Alan Berger, Delia Graff, and Teresa Robertson for discussion.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Salmon, N. Are General Terms Rigid? . Linguist Philos 28, 117–134 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-004-2430-2

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-004-2430-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation