Synthese 194 (3):963-988 (2017)
AbstractExtant contextualist theories have relied on the mechanism of pragmatically driven modulation to explain the way non-indexical expressions take on different interpretations in different contexts. In this paper I argue that a modulation-based contextualist semantics is untenable with respect to non-ambiguous expressions whose invariant meaning fails to determine a unique literal interpretation, such as ‘lawyer’ ‘musician’ ‘book’ and ‘game’. The invariant meaning of such an expression corresponds to a range of closely related and equally basic interpretations, none of which can be distinguished as the literal interpretation. Moreover, what counts as a literal interpretation as opposed to a non-literal one is arguably vague. The nonuniqueness of the literal interpretation and the vagueness in the literal/non-literal divide doubly challenge a modulation-based semantics, for modulation is supposed to operate on a unique literal interpretation to generate a clearly non-literal interpretation. Lastly I contend that non-ambiguous expressions which lack determinate literal interpretation are amenable to a Radical Contextualist semantics, according to which the invariant meaning of such an expression directs its interpretation to congruent background information in context. Thereby, these expressions exhibit semantically driven context sensitivity without displaying indexicality.
Similar books and articles
Literal Meaning, Conventional Meaning and First Meaning.C. J. L. Talmage - 1994 - Erkenntnis 40 (2):213 - 225.
Davidson, a Metáfora e os Domínios do Literal.Waldomiro José Filho da Silva - 2001 - Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana 6 (15):30-43.
The Alleged Priority of Literal Interpretation.François Récanati - 1995 - Cognitive Science 19 (2):207-232.
Revisiting the Contribution of Literal Meaning to Legal Meaning.Brian Flanagan - 2010 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 30 (2):255-271.
On the Distinction Between Literal and Non-Literal Language.David Ian Sturdee - 1999 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)
Taking Desirelessness () Seriously.Christopher G. Framarin - 2005 - Asian Philosophy 15 (2):143 – 155.
Minimal Semantics and Legal Interpretation.Izabela Skoczeń - 2016 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 29 (3):615-633.
“It Says What It Says”.Lars Hertzberg - 2011 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 85 (4):589-603.
Malapropisms and Davidson's Theories of Literal Meaning.John Michael McGuire - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:93-97.
Davidson on Meaning and Metaphor: Reply to Rahat.John Michael Mcguire - 2004 - Philosophia 31 (3-4):543-556.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Meaning Underdetermines What is Said, Therefore Utterances Express Many Propositions.Thomas Hodgson - 2018 - Dialectica 72 (2):165-189.
Knowing the Facts, Alternative and Otherwise.Clayton Littlejohn - forthcoming - In Rodrigo Borges & Ian Schnee (eds.), Illuminating Errors: New Essays on Knowledge from Non-Knowledge. Routledge.
References found in this work
Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.