In K. P. Turner (ed.), Making Semantics Pragmatic (CRiSPI, Vol. 24). Emerald (2011)

Authors
Gunnar Björnsson
Stockholm University
Abstract
It is generally agreed that constructions of the form “if P, Q” are capable of conveying a number of different relations between antecedent and consequent, with pragmatics playing a central role in determining these relations. Controversy concerns what the conventional contribution of the if-clause is, how it constrains the pragmatic processes, and what those processes are. In this essay, I begin to argue that the conventional contribution of if-clauses to semantics is exhausted by the fact that these clauses introduce a proposition without presenting it as true so that the consequent can be understood in relation to it. Given our cognitive interests in such non-truth-presentational introductions, conditionals will make salient the wide but nevertheless disciplined variety of contents that we naturally attribute to them; no further substantial constraints of the sorts proposed by standard theories of conditionals are needed to explain the phenomena. If this is correct, it provides prima facie evidence for a radically contextualist account of conditionals according to which conditionals have no truth-evaluable or intuitively complete content absent some contextually provided, sufficiently salient relation between antecedent and consequent.
Keywords Conditionals  Pragmatics  consequence conditionals  relevance conditionals  premise conditionals  material implication  indicative conditionals  epistemic context dependence  speech-act conditionals
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Logic and Conversation.H. Paul Grice - 1975 - In Maite Ezcurdia & Robert J. Stainton (eds.), The Semantics-Pragmatics Boundary in Philosophy. Broadview Press. pp. 47.
Ifs and Oughts.Niko Kolodny & John MacFarlane - 2010 - Journal of Philosophy 107 (3):115-143.
On Conditionals.Dorothy Edgington - 1995 - Mind 104 (414):235-329.

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Fourth Account of Conditionals in Sextus Empiricus.Michael J. White - 1986 - History and Philosophy of Logic 7 (1):1-14.
Subjunctive Biscuit and Stand-Off Conditionals.Eric Swanson - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 163 (3):637-648.
Double Conditionals.Adam Morton - 1990 - Analysis 50 (2):75 - 79.
Conditionals.Frank Jackson (ed.) - 1991 - Oxford University Press.
Strawson on 'If' and ⊃.Gunnar Björnsson - 2008 - South African Journal of Philosophy 27 (3):24-35.
Lying with Conditionals.Roy Sorensen - 2012 - Philosophical Quarterly 62 (249):820-832.
What If ? Questions About Conditionals.Dorothy Edgington - 2003 - Mind and Language 18 (4):380–401.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-10-02

Total views
502 ( #14,707 of 2,444,722 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
30 ( #25,125 of 2,444,722 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes