Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 14, Issue 6, pp 711–739 | Cite as

Representingde re beliefs

  • Thomas J. McKay


Artificial Intelligence Computational Linguistic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bach, Emmon and Barbara Partee: 1980, ‘Anaphora and Semantic Structure’, in Jody Kreiman and Almerindo E. Ojeda (eds.),Pronouns and Anaphora, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, Kent: 1987,Thought and Reference, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Boër, Steven and William Lycan: 1980, ‘Who, Me?’,Philosophical Review 89, 427–466.Google Scholar
  4. Evans, Gareth: 1985,Collected Papers, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, Gareth: 1980, ‘Pronouns’,Linguistic Inquiry 11, 337–362, reprinted in Evans: 1985, pp. 214–248.Google Scholar
  6. May, Robert: 1988, ‘Bound Variable Anaphora’, in Ruth M. Kempson (ed.)Mental Representations, Cambridge, pp. 85–104.Google Scholar
  7. McKay, Thomas: 1988, ‘De Re andDe Se Belief’, in David Austin (ed.),Philosophical Analysis, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 207–217.Google Scholar
  8. McKay, Thomas: 1991a, ‘he himself: Undiscovering an Anaphor’,Linguistic Inquiry 22, 368–373.Google Scholar
  9. McKay, Thomas: 19916, ‘Unbound Pronouns’, manuscript.Google Scholar
  10. Reinhart, Tanya: 1983,Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation, Croom Helm, London.Google Scholar
  11. Reinhart, Tanya: 1986, ‘Center and Periphery in the Grammar of Anaphora’, inStudies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, Vol. 1, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 123–150.Google Scholar
  12. Richard, Mark: 1983, ‘Direct Reference and Ascription of Belief’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 12, 425–452, reprinted in Salmon and Soames: 1988, pp. 169–196.Google Scholar
  13. Richard, Mark: 1990, Propositional Attitudes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  14. Salmon, Nathan: 1986, ‘Reflexivity’, inNotre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 27, 401–429, reprinted in Salmon and Soames: 1988, pp. 240–274.Google Scholar
  15. Salmon, Nathan: 1991, ‘Reflections on Reflexivity’, to appear inLinguistics and Philosophy.15 (February 1992).Google Scholar
  16. Salmon, Nathan and Scott Soames: 1988,Propositions and Attitudes, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Soames, Scott: 1987a, ‘Direct Reference, Propositional Attitudes, and Semantic Content’,Philosophical Topics 15, 47–87, reprinted in Salmon and Soames: 1988, pp. 197–239.Google Scholar
  18. Soames, Scott: 1987b, ‘Substitutivity’, in J. J. Thomson (ed.)On Being and Saying: Essays for Richard Cartwright, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  19. Soames, Scott: 1990, ‘Pronouns and Propositional Attitudes’,Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society.Google Scholar
  20. Soames, Scott: 1991, “Attitudes and Anaphors,” manuscript.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas J. McKay
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations