Journal of Pragmatics 41 (7):1422-1434 (2009)
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 a framework of dynamic semantics can achieve this result. Thus negative existentials provide a case in support of dynamic semantics.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Context Dependence and Implicit Arguments in Existentials.Itamar Francez - 2010 - Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (1):11-30.
Can Negative Existentials Be Referentially Vindicated?Alberto Voltolini - 1994 - Lingua E Stile 29:397-419.
Unstable Truthmaking.Jamin Asay & Sam Baron - 2012 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (3):230-238.
Negative Existentials, Omniscience, and Cosmic Luck.Christopher Hughes - 1998 - Religious Studies 34 (4):375-401.
Kaplan Rigidity, Time, and Modality.Gilbert Plumer - 1988 - Logique Et Analyse 31 (123-124):329-335.
Mustn't Whatever is Referred to Exist?Gilbert Plumer - 1989 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 27 (4):511-528.
Pretense, Existence, and Fictional Objects.Anthony Everett - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (1):56–80.
Parmenides' Paradox: Negative Reference and Negative Existentials.J. K. Swindler - 1980 - Review of Metaphysics 33 (4):727 - 744.
Added to index2012-03-01
Total downloads46 ( #113,709 of 2,171,910 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #117,896 of 2,171,910 )
How can I increase my downloads?