"Is There a Uniform Explanation for Strawsonian Contrast Cases?"

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Filozofia Nauki Pub Date : 2018-12-31 DOI:10.14394/FILNAU.2018.0022
Zoltán Vecsey
{"title":"\"Is There a Uniform Explanation for Strawsonian Contrast Cases?\"","authors":"Zoltán Vecsey","doi":"10.14394/FILNAU.2018.0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Strawson once observed that sentences containing non-referring definite descriptions tend to elicit different types of intuitive responses from language users. While some of these sentences elicit a sense of squeamishness, others elicit a robust sense of falsity. Strawson explained this type of response difference in terms of presupposition and topicality. In the last decades, Strawson’s approach has been often criticized on the ground that it cannot provide a uniform explanation forall possible occurrences of non-referring definites. In this paper, I examine two recent Strawson-inspired projects and argue that they also fall short of providing a uniform explanation of the data. In the final section, I briefly delineate an alternative approach, which seems to have greater explanatory power than its rivals.","PeriodicalId":41424,"journal":{"name":"Filozofia Nauki","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filozofia Nauki","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14394/FILNAU.2018.0022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Strawson once observed that sentences containing non-referring definite descriptions tend to elicit different types of intuitive responses from language users. While some of these sentences elicit a sense of squeamishness, others elicit a robust sense of falsity. Strawson explained this type of response difference in terms of presupposition and topicality. In the last decades, Strawson’s approach has been often criticized on the ground that it cannot provide a uniform explanation forall possible occurrences of non-referring definites. In this paper, I examine two recent Strawson-inspired projects and argue that they also fall short of providing a uniform explanation of the data. In the final section, I briefly delineate an alternative approach, which seems to have greater explanatory power than its rivals.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"斯特劳森对比案例有统一的解释吗?"
Strawson曾经观察到,包含非指称的明确描述的句子往往会引起语言使用者不同类型的直觉反应。其中一些句子会让人产生一种神经质的感觉,而另一些则会让人产生一种强烈的虚假感。斯特劳森从预设和话题性两个方面解释了这种类型的反应差异。在过去的几十年里,斯特劳森的方法经常受到批评,理由是它不能为所有可能出现的非指称定义提供统一的解释。在本文中,我考察了最近两个受斯特劳森启发的项目,并认为它们也未能对数据提供统一的解释。在最后一节中,我简要地描述了另一种方法,它似乎比其他方法更具解释力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Filozofia Nauki
Filozofia Nauki PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Filozofia Nauki (The Philosophy of Science) is a double-blind peer-reviewed academic quarterly published by the Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw. It publishes articles, notes, and reviews covering the whole range of analytic philosophy, including among others: epistemology, ontology, general philosophy of science, philosophy of physics, philosophy of biology, philosophy of mathematics, philosophical logic, philosophy of language, philosophy of action, philosophy of mind, cognitive sciences, experimental philosophy. We invite papers not only from professional philosophers but also from specialists in different areas, interested in generalizing their scientific experiences towards more foundational issues.
期刊最新文献
Obowiązek oparty na preferencji Realizm naukowy a hipoteza ciemnej materii i ciemnej energii Giuseppe Veronesego konstruktywizm arytmetyczny a poznawalność nieskończoności. Studium wybranych wątków filozofii matematyki we wprowadzeniu do Grundzüge der Geometrie von mehreren Dimensionen Pseudodarwinizm selekcjonistycznych modeli rozwoju nauki Niedostatki metod kwestionariuszowych w filozofii eksperymentalnej
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1