Abstract
In the last decade the enterprise of formal semantics has been under attack from several philosophical and linguistic perspectives, and it has certainly suffered from its own scattered state, which hosts quite a variety of paradigms which may seem to be incompatible. It will not do to try and answer the arguments of the critics, because the arguments are often well-taken. The negative conclusions, however, I believe are not. The only adequate reply seems to be a constructive one, which puts several pieces of formal semantics, in particular dynamic semantics, together again.
Keywords formal semantics  dynamic semantics
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.4148/biyclc.v6i0.1566
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,261
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Metalinguistic Value Disagreement.Erich Rast - 2017 - Studia Semiotyczne 31 (2):139-159.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Jigsaw Semantics.Paul J. E. Dekker - 2011 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6:1-26.
Solving the Jigsaw Puzzle.Peggy Cadet - 2015 - Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics 5 (2):E1-E3.
Kripke Bundle Semantics and C-Set Semantics.Eiko Isoda - 1997 - Studia Logica 58 (3):395-401.
On the Lumping Semantics of Counterfactuals.M. Kanazawa - 2005 - Journal of Semantics 22 (2):129-151.
Semantics: A Reader.Steven Davis & Brendan S. Gillon (eds.) - 2004 - Oxford University Press.
“Four-Valued” Semantics for the Relevant Logic R.Edwin D. Mares - 2004 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (3):327-341.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-02-04

Total views
20 ( #540,902 of 2,455,876 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,201 of 2,455,876 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes