Mind and Language 16 (5):547–563 (2001)
Two semantic theories of proper names are explained and assessed. The theories are Burge’s treatment of proper names as complex demonstratives and Larson and Segal’s quasi-descriptivist account of names. The two theories are evaluated for empirical plausibility. Data from deficits, processing models, developmental studies and syntax are all discussed. It is concluded that neither theory is fully confirmed or refuted by the data, but that Larson and Segal’s theory has more empirical plausibility
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
Against Arguments From Reference.Ron Mallon, Edouard Machery, Shaun Nichols & Stephen Stich - 2009 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (2):332 - 356.
Experimental Semantics.Michael Devitt - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82 (2):418 - 435.
Meta-Externalism Vs Meta-Internalism in the Study of Reference.Daniel Cohnitz & Jussi Haukioja - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (3):475-500.
On the Unification Argument for the Predicate View on Proper Names.Dolf Rami - 2014 - Synthese 191 (5):1-22.
Similar books and articles
You Can Call Me 'Stupid', ... Just Don't Call Me Stupid.Delia Graff Fara - 2011 - Analysis 71 (3):492-501.
A Critique of Kripke's Theories of Proper Names and Names of Natural Kinds : An Application of the Later Wittgenstein's Methodology.Kai-Yan Chan & 陳啟恩 - unknown
Proper Names and Their Fictional Uses.Heidi Tiedke - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (4):707 - 726.
On Problems with Descriptivism: Psychological Assumptions and Empirical Evidence.Eduardo García-Ramírez & Marilyn Shatz - 2011 - Mind and Language 26 (1):53-77.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads69 ( #77,046 of 2,177,828 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,251 of 2,177,828 )
How can I increase my downloads?