Axiomathes 31 (3):229-249 (2021)
AbstractViebahn (2018) has recently argued that several tests for ambiguity, such as the conjunction-reduction test, are not reliable as tests for polysemy, but only as tests for homonymy. I look at the more fine-grained distinction between regular and irregular polysemy and I argue for a more nuanced conclusion: the tests under discussion provide systematic evidence for homonymy and irregular polysemy but need to be used with more care to test for regular polysemy. I put this conclusion at work in the context of the debate over the alleged referential-attributive ambiguity of the definite article. In reply to various criticisms, defenders of the ambiguity view argue that this is a case of polysemy. But opponents object that the dual use of the definite article fails tests for ambiguity. The debate seems to have come to stalemate, unless the relevance of the tests is determined for cases of alleged polysemy. I conclude that the balance of considerations incline towards rejecting the ambiguity thesis.
Similar books and articles
How many meanings for ‘may’? The case for modal polysemy.Barbara Vetter & Emanuel Viebahn - 2016 - Philosophers' Imprint 16.
A linguistic grounding for a polysemy theory of ‘knows’.Mark Satta - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (5):1163-1182.
Can minimalism about truth embrace polysemy?Katarzyna Kijania-Placek - 2018 - Synthese 195 (3):955-985.
Lexical Semantics: The Problem of Polysemy.J. Pustejovsky & Bran Boguraev (eds.) - 1997 - Oxford University Press.
Polysemy: Current perspectives and approaches.Ingrid Lossius Falkum & Agustin Vicente - 2015 - Lingua:DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.02.00.
Ambiguity and explanation.Jonathan L. Shaheen - 2017 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 60 (8):839-866.
What can polysemy tell us about theories of explanation?Maria Şerban - 2017 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 7 (1):41-56.
The green leaves and the expert: polysemy and truth-conditional variability.Agustin Vicente - 2015 - Lingua 157:54-65.
Polysemy and word meaning: an account of lexical meaning for different kinds of content words.Agustin Vicente - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (4):947-968.
Describing polysemy: the case of 'crawl'.Charles J. Fillmore & Beryl Ts Atkins - 2000 - In Yael Ravin & Claudia Leacock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches. Oxford University Press.
The Extent of the Literal: Metaphor, Polysemy and the Theories of Concepts.Marina Rakova - 2003 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Polysemy: a problem of definition.Cliff Goddard - 2000 - In Yael Ravin & Claudia Leacock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches. Oxford University Press. pp. 129--151.
Mnogoznachnostʹ V I͡azyke I Sposoby Ee Predstavlenii͡a.Anna A. Zalizni͡ak - 2006 - I͡azyki Slavi͡anskikh Kulʹtur.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Rational supererogation and epistemic permissivism.Robert Weston Siscoe - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179 (2):571-591.
Speaker’s Referent and Semantic Referent in Interpretive Interaction.Palle Leth - 2020 - Studia Semiotyczne 34 (2):65-80.
References found in this work
Relevance: Communication and Cognition.Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 1986/1995 - Oxford: Blackwell.
Reference and definite descriptions.Keith S. Donnellan - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.
Speaker’s Reference and Semantic Reference.Saul A. Kripke - 1977 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 2 (1):255-276.
Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution.Ray Jackendoff - 2002 - Oxford University Press UK.