By Reinhard Muskens
Muskens substantially simplifies Montague Semantics and generalises the speculation by way of basing it on a partial larger order common sense leading to a thought which mixes vital elements of Montague Semantics and state of affairs Semantics. Richard Montague formulated the innovative perception that we will comprehend the idea that of which means in usual languages a lot within the comparable means as we comprehend the semantics of logical languages. regrettably, he formalised his notion in an unnecessarily complicated approach. the current paintings does away with pointless complexities, obtains a streamlined model of the idea, indicates how partialising the speculation immediately offers us with the main significant recommendations of state of affairs Semantics, and provides an easy logical remedy of propositional perspective verbs, belief verbs and correct names.
Read or Download Meaning and Partiality PDF
Best semantics books
The LNCS magazine on information Semantics is dedicated to the presentation of remarkable paintings that, in a single method or one other, addresses learn and improvement on matters with regards to info semantics. The scope of the magazine levels from theories helping the formal definition of semantic content material to leading edge domain-specific purposes of semantic wisdom.
Fifteen particularly written papers study the ways that the content material of what we are saying relies at the context during which we are saying it. on the centre of the present debate in this topic is Cappelen and Lepore's declare that context-sensitivity in language is healthier captured by way of a mix of semantic minimalism and speech act pluralism.
This quantity brings jointly twelve papers by means of linguists and philosophers contributing novel empirical and formal issues to theorizing approximately vagueness. 3 major matters are addressed: gradable expressions and comparability, the semantics of measure adverbs and intensifiers (such as 'clearly'), and methods of evading the sorites paradox.
The 4 papers awarded during this quantity are corpus-based investigations into the that means of the verbs converse, speak, say and inform. extra particularly they wish to discover how the scene of linguistic motion has been positioned into standpoint via those 4 high-frequency verbs.
- Mapping English Metaphor Through Time
- Concept Structuring Systems (Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. 1)
- Was ist ein Text? Alttestamentliche, ägyptologische und altorientalistische Perspektiven
- Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar
Extra info for Meaning and Partiality
A practical consequence of this move is a greater modularity: should we want to change our temporal ontology, replacing moments of time by intervals for example, we can simply change the axioms AX1, . . , AX8; there is no need to fuss with the underlying logic. Gallin’s embedding helps us to see why Beta Conversion, Universal Instantiation and Leibniz’s Law are subject to such strange restrictions in IL. Constants in IL are of a mixed character: in fact they can be viewed as constants carrying a hidden variable with them.
If expressions stand for the same thing, they are interchangeable in all contexts. It follows that the expressions Sara and Miss America, that are clearly not interchangeable in modal or temporal contexts, cannot have the same semantic value. Expressions stand for their meanings, not for their references. Therefore it is wrong to translate Sara is Miss America as an identity statement. It may be true that Sara is Miss America but it is certainly false that Sara means Miss America. This point of view leads us away from the ideas behind the logic IL but it is not in conflict with possible worlds semantics as such, for we can continue to treat the meaning of a sentence as a set of indices, the meaning of an intransitive verb as a function from indices to sets of entities and so on.
Dowty 1982 has an interesting discussion of this point and traces the idea of separating grammatical rules and syntactic operations back to Curry 1963, who calls the universal part of language ‘tectogrammatics’, the language-particular part ‘phenogrammatics’. Grammatical relations, like ‘subject’, ‘object’ and ‘indirect object’, are universal, and hence tectogrammatical, in nature, Dowty claims. And indeed it is easy to define such relations on the basis of our analysis trees. For more motivation along these lines see Dowty’s work.
Meaning and Partiality by Reinhard Muskens