The Fregean analysis of definite descriptions as referring expressions predicts that copular sentences with definite descriptions in postcopular position are invariably interpreted as identity statements. But as numerous diagnostics show, such sentences are frequently capable of receiving a predicational reading. A uniform Fregean analysis therefore won’t do. Things aren’t that simple, however. I show that descriptions which exhibit the structure [the + N + of + Proper Name] fall into two semantically distinct classes, and that the members of one of these classes of descriptions (those I call “identifying”) pattern with proper names in resisting a predicative reading. I argue that a proposal according to which referring expressions can quite generally undergo a type shift that transforms them into predicates thus fails on grounds of overgeneration. I propose that we can account for the data by instead appealing to two definite determiners: a Fregean determiner ‘the r ’ which forms referring descriptions, and a determiner ‘the p ’ which forms predicative descriptions. I argue that this proposal also correctly predicts that copular sentences with proper names in postcopular position fail to have a predicational reading. I conclude the paper by defending the analysis of names to which I appeal against an alternative view inspired by Burge (J Philos 70(14):425–439, 1973), and suggest a way in which the desired results could be achieved while making do with a single definite article.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Barker C. (1995) Possessive definites. CSLI Publications, Stanford
Barker, C. (2011). Possessives and relational nouns. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (Vol. 2, pp. 1109–1130). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Bowers J. (1993) The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24(4): 591–656
Burge T. (1973) Reference and proper names. The Journal of Philosophy 70(14): 425–439
Chomsky N. (1965) Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge MA
Comorovski, I. (2007). Constituent questions and the copula of specification. In I. Comorovski & K. von Heusinger (Eds.), Existence: Semantics and syntax. of Studies in linguistics and philosophy (Vol. 84, pp. 49–77). Dordrecht: Springer.
Devitt M. (2005) Rigid application. Philosophical Studies 125: 139–165
Elbourne P. (2005) Situations and individuals. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Elbourne P. (2010) The existence entailments of definite descriptions. Linguistics and Philosophy 33(1): 1–10
Fara D. G. (2001) Descriptions as predicates. Philosophical Studies 102: 1–42
Fara, D. G. (2006). Descriptions with adverbs of quantification. Philosophical Issues. Philosophy of language (Vol. 16, pp. 65–87). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Frege, G. (1997). Comments on Sinn and Bedeutung. In M. Beaney (Ed.), The Frege Reader (pp. 172–180). Oxford: Blackwell.
Geist, L. (2007). Predication and equation in copular sentences: Russian vs. English. In I. Comorovski & K. von Heusinger (Eds.), Existence: Semantics and syntax. Studies in linguistics and philosophy (Vol. 84, pp. 79–105). Dordrecht: Springer.
Heim, I. (1991). Artikel und Definitheit. In A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (Eds.), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Heim I., Kratzer A. (1998) Semantics in generative grammar. Blackwell, Malden, MA
Heller, D. (2005). Identity and information: Semantic and pragmatic aspects of specificational sentences. Ph.D. Thesis, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
Heycock C., Kroch A. (1999) Pseudocleft connectedness: Implications for the LF interface level. Linguistic Inquiry 30(3): 365–397
Higgins F. (1979) The pseudo-cleft construction in English. Garland Publishing, New York
Hofweber T. (2005a) A puzzle about ontology. Noûs 39(2): 256–283
Hofweber T. (2005b) Supervenience and object-dependent properties. The Journal of Philosophy 102(1): 1–28
Jackendoff R. (1984) On the phrase the phrase ‘the phrase’. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 2(1): 25–37
Kripke, S. (1977). Speaker’s reference and semantic reference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 2(1), 255–276.
Larson R., Segal G. (1995) Knowledge of meaning: An introduction to semantic theory. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Lasersohn, P. (1986). The semantics of appositive and pseudo-appositive NP’s. In F. Marshall, A. Miller, & Z. S. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of the third easter states conference on linguistics (pp. 311–322). Pittsburgh, PA: The University of Pittsburgh.
Lasersohn P. (2009) Relative truth, speark commitment, and control of implicit arguments. Synthese 166(2): 359–374
Löbner S. (1985) Definites. Journal of Semantics 4(4): 279–326
Löbner S. (2011) Concept types and determination. Journal of Semantics 28(3): 279–333
Matushansky, O. (2006). Why rose is the rose: On the use of definite articles in proper names. In O. Bonami & P. C. Hofherr (Eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 6. Paris: Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris.
Meyer, C. F. (1989). Restrictive apposition: An intermediate category. English Studies, 70, 147–166.
Mikkelsen, L. (2005). Copular clauses: Specification, predication and equation. Linguistik Aktuell 85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mikkelsen, L. (2011). Copular clauses. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (Vol. 2, pp. 1805–1829). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Partee, B. (1986a). Ambiguous pseudoclefts with unambiguous be. In Compositionality in formal semantics: Selected papers, 2004. Oxford: Blackwell.
Partee, B. (1986b). Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In Compositionality in formal semantics: Selected papers. Oxford: Blackwell.
Payne, J., & Huddleston, R. (2002). Nouns and noun phrases. In R. Huddleston & G. K. Pullum (Eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language (Chap. 5, pp. 323–524). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quine W. V. (1960) Word and object. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Rieppel, M. (2013). Being something: Prospects for a property-based approach to predicative quantification. Ph.D. Thesis, UC Berkeley.
Rothstein, S. (1995). Small clauses and copular constructions. In Syntax and semantics, Vol. 28: Small Clauses. New York: Academic Press.
Russell B. (1905) On denoting. Mind 14: 479–493
Schiffer, S. (2003). The things we mean. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Schwarz, F. (2009). Two types of definites in natural language. Ph.D. Thesis, UMass Amherst.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts, 2009 edition. London: Cambridge University Press.
Sloat C. (1969) Proper nouns in English. Language 45(1): 26–30
Soames S. (2002) Beyond rigidity. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Strawson P. F. (1950) On referring. Mind 59(235): 320–344
Szabó Z. G. (2000) Descriptions and uniqueness. Philosophical Studies 101(1): 29–57
Teichmann R. (1989) Three kinds of realism about universals. The Philosophical Quarterly 39(155): 143–165
Williams E. (1983) Semantic vs. syntactic categories. Linguistics and Philosophy 6: 423–446
Wright, C. (1998). Why Frege does not deserve his Granum Salis. In J. L. Brandl & P. Sullivan (Eds.), New essays on the philosophy of Michael Dummett. Grazer Philosophische Studien, Internationale Zeitschrift für Analytische Philosophie (Vol. 55, pp. 239–263). Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi B.V.
About this article
Cite this article
Rieppel, M. The double life of ‘The mayor of Oakland’. Linguist and Philos 36, 417–446 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-013-9141-5
- Copular clauses
- Predication and equation
- Definite descriptions
- Proper names