Essentializing Inferences

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Mind & Language Pub Date : 2021-02-02 DOI:10.31234/osf.io/8mchf
K. Ritchie
{"title":"Essentializing Inferences","authors":"K. Ritchie","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/8mchf","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Predicate nominals (e.g., ‘is a female’) seem to label or categorize their subjects, while their predicate adjective correlates (e.g, ‘is female’) merely attribute a property. Further, predicate nominals elicit essentializing inferential judgments about inductive potential as well as stable explanatory membership. Semantic data and research from developmental and cognitive psychology support that this distinction is robust and productive. I argue that while the difference between predicate nominals and predicate adjectives is elided by standard semantic theories, it ought not be. I then develop and defend a psychologically motivated semantic account that takes predicate nominals to involve attributing kind membership and to trigger a presupposition that underpins our essentialist judgments.","PeriodicalId":51472,"journal":{"name":"Mind & Language","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mind & Language","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8mchf","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Predicate nominals (e.g., ‘is a female’) seem to label or categorize their subjects, while their predicate adjective correlates (e.g, ‘is female’) merely attribute a property. Further, predicate nominals elicit essentializing inferential judgments about inductive potential as well as stable explanatory membership. Semantic data and research from developmental and cognitive psychology support that this distinction is robust and productive. I argue that while the difference between predicate nominals and predicate adjectives is elided by standard semantic theories, it ought not be. I then develop and defend a psychologically motivated semantic account that takes predicate nominals to involve attributing kind membership and to trigger a presupposition that underpins our essentialist judgments.
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
所谓推断
谓语主词(例如“is a female”)似乎是对其主语进行标记或分类,而其谓语-形容词相关词(例如,“is female(是女性)”)只是赋予一个属性。此外,谓语主格引发了关于归纳势的本质化推理判断以及稳定的解释隶属度。语义数据和来自发展和认知心理学的研究支持这种区别是有力的和富有成效的。我认为,虽然标准语义理论忽略了谓语主词和谓语形容词之间的区别,但它不应该被忽略。然后,我发展并捍卫了一种基于心理动机的语义解释,认为谓语主词涉及归因种类成员关系,并触发了一个支撑我们本质主义判断的预设。
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
Mind & Language
Mind & Language Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊最新文献
Vigilance and mind wandering Self‐location in perceptual experience: A top‐down account Emotion descriptions and musical expressiveness In defense of language‐independent flexibility, or: What rodents and humans can do without language Craving for drugs
×
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