Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (4):341-395 (2011)

Authors
Philippe Schlenker
Institut Jean Nicod
Abstract
There are two main approaches to the problem of donkey anaphora (e.g. If John owns a donkey , he beats it ). Proponents of dynamic approaches take the pronoun to be a logical variable, but they revise the semantics of quantifiers so as to allow them to bind variables that are not within their syntactic scope. Older dynamic approaches took this measure to apply solely to existential quantifiers; recent dynamic approaches have extended it to all quantifiers. By contrast, proponents of E-type analyses take the pronoun to have the semantics of a definite description (with it ≈ the donkey, or the donkey that John owns ). While competing accounts make very different claims about the patterns of coindexation that are found in the syntax, these are not morphologically realized in spoken languages. But they are in sign language, namely through locus assignment and pointing. We make two main claims on the basis of ASL and LSF data. First, sign language data favor dynamic over E-type theories: in those cases in which the two approaches make conflicting predictions about possible patterns of coindexation, dynamic analyses are at an advantage. Second, among dynamic theories, sign language data favor recent ones because the very same formal mechanism is used irrespective of the indefinite or non-indefinite nature of the antecedent. Going beyond this debate, we argue that dynamic theories should allow pronouns to be bound across negative expressions, as long as the pronoun is presupposed to have a non-empty denotation. Finally, an appendix displays and explains subtle differences between overt sign language pronouns and all other pronouns in examples involving ‘disjunctive antecedents’, and suggests that counterparts of sign language loci might be found in spoken language
Keywords Anaphora  E-type anaphora  Donkey anaphora  Dynamic semantics  Sign language
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10988-011-9098-1
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: 65,683
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reference and Generality.P. T. Geach - 1962 - Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

View all 28 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Anaphora.Jeffrey C. King & Karen S. Lewis - 2016 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Iconic Variables.Philippe Schlenker, Jonathan Lamberton & Mirko Santoro - 2013 - Linguistics and Philosophy 36 (2):91-149.
The Mental Files Theory of Singular Thought: A Psychological Perspective.Michael Murez, Joulia Smortchkova & Brent Strickland - 2020 - In Rachel Goodman, James Genone & Nick Kroll (eds.), Singular Thought and Mental Files. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 107-142.
Intentional Identity and Descriptions.William Lanier - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (2):289-302.
What is Super Semantics?Philippe Schlenker - 2018 - Philosophical Perspectives 32 (1):365-453.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-12-21

Total views
46 ( #237,277 of 2,462,431 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,313 of 2,462,431 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes