Most philosophers recognize that applying the standard semantics for complex demonstratives to non-deictic instances results in truth conditions that are anomalous, at best. This fact has generated little concern, however, since most philosophers treat non-deictic demonstratives as marginal cases, and believe that they should be analyzed using a distinct semantic mechanism. In this paper, I argue that non-deictic demonstratives cannot be written off; they are widespread in English and foreign languages, and must be treated using the same semantic machinery that is applied to deictic instances.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Adger D. (2003) Core syntax. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Anthony, L. (2013, September 5). Academia’s fog of male anxiety. The New York Times.
Borg E. (2000) Complex demonstratives. Philosohpical Studies 97: 229–249
Braun D. (2008) Complex demonstratives and their singular contents. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(1): 57–99
Carnie A. (2002) Syntax: A generative introduction. Blackwell, Oxford
Chierchia G., McConnell-Ginet S. (2000) Meaning and grammar. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Comorovski, I. (2007). Existence: Semantics and syntax. In I. Comorovksi & K. von Heusinger (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 9, pp. 49–78). Dordrecht: Springer.
Corrazza E. (2003) Complex demonstratives qua singular terms. Erkenntnis 59: 263–283
Dever J. (2001) Complex demonstratives. Linguistics and Philosophy 24(3): 271–330
Donellan K. (1966) Reference and definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 75: 281–304
Elbourne P. (2005) Situations and individuals. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Elbourne P. (2008) Demonstratives as individual concepts. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(4): 409–466
Georgi, G. (2012). Reference and ambiguity in complex demonstratives. In W. P. Kabasenche, M. O’Rourke, & M. H. Slater (Eds.), Reference and referring (pp. 357–384). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gundel J. K., Hedberg N., Zacharski R. (1993) Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69: 274–307
Heim I., Kratzer A. (1998) Semantics in generative grammar. Blackwell, Oxford
Kaplan, D. (1977/1989). Demonstratives. In J. Almong, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481–563). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kaplan, D. (1989). Afterthoughts. In J. Almong, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 565–614). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
King J. C. (1999) Are complex ‘that’ phrases devices of direct reference?. Noûs 33(2): 155–182
King J. C. (2001) Complex demonstratives: A quantificational account. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
King J. C. (2008) Complex demonstratives, QI uses, and direct reference. Philosophical Review 117(1): 99–117
Lepore E., Ludwig K. (2000) The semantics and pragmatics of complex demonstratives. Mind 109: 199–240
Mazur, R. (2013, January 2). How to halt the terrorist money train. The New York Times.
Neale S. (1993) Term limits. Philosophical Perspectives 7: 89–123
Nowak, E. (in preparation). Demonstratives, hidden arguments, and presupposition.
Nunberg G. (1993) Indexicality and deixis. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(1): 1–43
Roberts, C. (2002). Demonstratives as definites. In K. van Deemter & R. Kibble (Eds.), Information sharing. Stanford: CSLI.
Salmon N. (2002) Demonstrating and necessity. Philosophical Review 111(4): 497–537
Salmon N. (2006) Terms in bondage. Philosophical Issues 16: 263–274
Salmon N. (2008) That F. Philosophical Studies 141: 263–280
Wolter, L. (2006). That’s that; the semantics and pragmatics of demonstrative noun phrases. PhD thesis, University of California at Santa Cruz.
Yalcin, S. (2014). Semantics and metasemantics in the context of generative grammar. In A. Burgess & B. Sherman (Eds.), Metasemantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
About this article
Cite this article
Nowak, E. Demonstratives without rigidity or ambiguity (penultimate draft). Linguist and Philos 37, 409–436 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-014-9159-3
- Complex demonstratives
- Direct Reference