Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 158, Issue 3, pp 401–413 | Cite as

Propositions, semantic values, and rigidity

  • Dilip Ninan
Article

Abstract

Jeffrey King has recently argued: (i) that the semantic value of a sentence at a context is (or determines) a function from possible worlds to truth values, and (ii) that this undermines Jason Stanley's argument against the rigidity thesis, the claim that no rigid term has the same content as a non-rigid term. I show that King's main argument for (i) fails, and that Stanley's argument is consistent with the claim that the semantic value of a sentence at a context is (or determines) a function from worlds to truth values.

Keywords

Propositions Operators Quantifiers Tense Modality Rigidity Two-dimensionalism 

Notes

Acknowledgments

For helpful comments, thanks to Alejandro Pérez Carballo, Paolo Santorio, Seth Yalcin, and an anonymous referee for Philosophical Studies.

References

  1. Kaplan, D. (1989). Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481−563). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. King, J. C. (2003). Tense, modality, and semantic values. Philosophical Perspectives, 17, 195–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. King, J. C. (2007). The nature and structure of content. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kusumoto, K. (1999). Tense in embedded contexts. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  5. Lewis, D. K. (1980). Index, context, and content. In S. Kanger, & S. Öhman (Eds.), Philosophy and grammar (pp. 79–100). Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. (Reprinted from Lewis 1998, pp. 21–44, Page references to are to the 1998 reprint).Google Scholar
  6. Lewis, D. K. (1998). Papers in philosophical logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Percus, O. (2000). Constraints on some other variables in syntax. Natural Language Semantics, 8, 173–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Schlenker, P. (2004). Person and binding (a partial survey). Italian Journal of Linguistics/Rivista di Linguistica, 16(1), 155–218.Google Scholar
  9. Stanley, J. (1997a). Names and rigid designation. In B. Hale, & C. Wright (Eds.), A companion to philosophy of language. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Stanley, J. (1997b). Rigidity and content. In: R. Heck (Ed.), Language, thought, and logic, (pp. 131–156). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Stanley, J. (2002). Modality and what is said. Philosophical Perspectives, 16, 321–344.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arché Philosophical Research CentreUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsUK

Personalised recommendations