Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 259–294

Local satisfaction guaranteed: A presupposition theory and its problems

  • Bart Geurts
Article

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beaver, D. I.: 1992, ‘The Kinematics of Presupposition’, in P. Dekker and M. Stokhof (eds.),Proceedings of the 8th Amsterdam Colloquium. University of Amsterdam, pp. 17–36.Google Scholar
  2. Beaver, D. L: 1993,What Comes First in Dynamic Semantics, ILLC Prepublication Series LP-93-15, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  3. Chierchia, G. and S. McConnell-Ginet: 1990,Meaning and Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  4. Davis, S. (ed.): 1991,Pragmatics: A Reader, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Gazdar, G.: 1979,Pragmatics. Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Geurts, B.: 1993, ‘Constraints on Presupposition Projection’, in R. A. van der Sandt (ed.),Presupposition and Anaphora, Workshop Reader, Fifth European Summer School in Logic, Language, and Information, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  7. Geurts, B.: 1995,Presupposing, Doctoral dissertation, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  8. Heim, I.: 1982,The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phases, Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  9. Heim, I.: 1983, ‘On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions’,Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 2, 114–126. Reprinted in Davis (ed.) 1991: 397–405.Google Scholar
  10. Heim, I.: 1992, ‘Presupposition Projection and the Semantics of Attitude Verbs’,Journal of Semantics 9, 183–221.Google Scholar
  11. Kamp, H.: 1981, ‘A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation’, in J. A. G. Groenendijk, T. M. V. Janssen, and M. B. J. Stokhof (eds.),Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematical Centre Tracts 135, Amsterdam, pp. 277–322.Google Scholar
  12. Karttunen, L.: 1973, ‘Presuppositions of Compound Sentences’,Linguistic Inquiry 4, 167–193.Google Scholar
  13. Karttunen, L.: 1974, ‘Presupposition and Linguistic Context’,Theoretical Linguistics 1, 181–194. Reprinted in Davis (ed.) 1991: 406–415.Google Scholar
  14. Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional Implicature’, in C.-K. Oh and D. Dinneen (eds.),Syntax and Semantics, Presupposition, Vol. 11, Academic Press, New York, pp. 1–56.Google Scholar
  15. Krahmer, E.: 1993, ‘Partiality and Dynamics: Theory and Application’, in P. Dekker and M. Stokhof (eds.),Proceedings of the 9th Amsterdam Colloquium, University of Amsterdam, pp. 391–410.Google Scholar
  16. Krifka, M.: 1993, ‘Focus and Presupposition in Dynamic Interpretation’,Journal of Semantics 10, 269–300.Google Scholar
  17. Lewis, D. K.: 1973,Counterfactuals, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  18. Lewis, D. K.: 1979, ‘Scorekeeping in a Language Game’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 339–359. Reprinted in Davis (ed.) 1991: 416–427.Google Scholar
  19. Sæbø, K. J.: 1993, ‘Anaphoric Presuppositions and Zero Anaphora’, in P. Dekker and M. Stokhof (eds.),Proceedings of the 9th Amsterdam Colloquium, University of Amsterdam, pp. 567–586.Google Scholar
  20. Soames, S.: 1979, ‘A Projection Problem for Speaker Presuppositions’,Linguistic Inquiry 10, 623–666.Google Scholar
  21. Soames, S.: 1982, ‘How Presuppositions are Inherited: A Solution to the Projection Problem’,Linguistic Inquiry 13, 483–545. Reprinted in Davis (ed.) 1991: 428–470.Google Scholar
  22. Soames, S.: 1993, ‘Presupposition’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.),Handbook of Philosophical Logic IV. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 553–616.Google Scholar
  23. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1968, A Theory of Conditionals', in N. Rescher (ed.),Studies in Logical Theory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 98–112.Google Scholar
  24. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1973, ‘Presuppositions’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 2, 447–457.Google Scholar
  25. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1974, ‘Pragmatic Presuppositions’, in M. K. Munitz and P. K. Unger (eds.),Semantics and Philosophy, New York University Press, New York, pp. 197–213. Reprinted in Davis (ed.) 1991: 471–482.Google Scholar
  26. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1976, ‘Indicative Conditionals’, in A. Kasher (ed.),Language in Focus, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 179–196.Google Scholar
  27. Van der Sandt, R. A.: 1988,Context and Presupposition. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  28. Van der Sandt, R. A.: 1989, ‘Presupposition and Discourse Structure’, in R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem, and P. van Etude Boas (eds.),Semantics and Contextual Expression, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 267–294.Google Scholar
  29. Van der Sandt, R. A.: 1992, ‘Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution’,Journal of Semantics 9, 333–377.Google Scholar
  30. Van der Sandt, R. A. and B. Geurts: 1991, ‘Presupposition, Anaphora, and Lexical Content’, in O. Herzog and C.-R. Rollinger (eds.),Text Understanding in LILOG, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 259–296.Google Scholar
  31. Van Eijck, J.: 1991,Presupposition Failure: A Comedy of Errors, Ms, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  32. Van Eijck, J.: 1993, ‘The Dynamics of Description’,Journal of Semantics 10, 239–267.Google Scholar
  33. Van Fraassen, B.: 1969, ‘Presuppositions, Super-Valuations, and Free Logic’, in K. Lambert (ed.),The Logical Way of Doing Things, Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 67–91.Google Scholar
  34. Veltman, F.: 1990, ‘Defaults in Update Semantics’, in H. Kamp (ed.),Conditionals, Defaults and Belief Revision, DYANA Report R2.5.A, Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh, pp. 28–64.Google Scholar
  35. Zeevat, H.: 1992, ‘Presupposition and Accommodation in Update Semantics’,Journal of Semantics 9, 379–412.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart Geurts
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations