By Friederike Moltmann
Summary items were a valuable subject in philosophy considering the fact that antiquity. Philosophers have defended a number of perspectives approximately summary gadgets through beautiful to metaphysical issues, issues relating to arithmetic or technological know-how, and, now not every so often, intuitions approximately typical language. This ebook pursues the query of the way and no matter if common language makes it possible for connection with summary items in a completely systematic method. via making complete use of up to date linguistic semantics, it provides a far higher diversity of linguistic generalizations than has formerly been considered in philosophical discussions, and it argues for an ontological photo is especially diverse from that mostly taken with no consideration by way of philosophers and semanticists alike. connection with summary gadgets comparable to homes, numbers, propositions, and levels is significantly extra marginal than as a rule held. as a substitute, ordinary language is very beneficiant in permitting connection with particularized homes (tropes), using nonreferential expressions in obvious referential place, and using "nominalizing expressions," reminiscent of quantifiers like "something." connection with summary gadgets is completed normally purely by way of 'reifying terms', corresponding to "the quantity eight."
Read Online or Download Abstract Objects and the Semantics of Natural Language PDF
Similar semantics books
Ascriptions of psychological states to oneself and others provide upward push to many attention-grabbing logical and semantic difficulties. angle difficulties offers an unique account of psychological nation ascriptions which are made utilizing intensional transitive verbs corresponding to 'want', 'seek', 'imagine', and 'worship'.
The articles accrued during this publication are eager about the remedy of anaphora inside of generative grammar, particularly, inside Chomsky's 'Ex tended common thought' (EST). because the inception of this idea, and almost because the inception of generative grammar, anaphora has been a relevant subject of research.
R. G. Collingwood observed one of many major initiatives of philosophers and of historians of human inspiration in uncovering what he referred to as the final word presuppositions of other thinkers, of alternative philosophical activities and of whole eras of highbrow background. He additionally famous that such final presuppositions frequently stay tacit first and foremost, and are stumbled on simply through next mirrored image.
The verbal different types of annoying and point were studied commonly from the perspective in their connection with the timing and time-perspective of the speaker’s pronounced event. they're common different types either by way of the semantic-functional area they hide in addition to when it comes to their syntactic and morphological awareness.
- Redefining Indefinites
- Semiotics: the basics
- Representation and inference for natural language: a first course in computational semantics
- Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar
- Assurance: An Austinian view of Knowledge and Knowledge Claims
Additional info for Abstract Objects and the Semantics of Natural Language
I will call the latter the denominative complement.
John needs the possible instances of gold. c. The possible instances of gold exist. An explanation of this difference should be along the following lines. Deﬁnite NPs involving a single domain of entities, which in the presence of possible will be extended to a domain of merely possible entities. By contrast, kind terms involve plural reference to different individuals in different domains, belonging to different circumstances. Kind terms as plurally referring terms also allow for higher-level plural reference.
There is some evidence, though, that distributivity is, in a certain sense, obligatory even with plurals. It comes from predicates expressing size or conﬁguration. Such predicates in principle could have both a collective and a distributive reading with deﬁnite plurals. However, with plurals, unlike with collective NPs, they enforce a distributive interpretation: (71) a. The children are big (no collective reading). b. The group of children is big (collective reading). (72) a. The pictures are large (no collective reading).
Abstract Objects and the Semantics of Natural Language by Friederike Moltmann