Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 25, Issue 5–6, pp 701–721 | Cite as

Common Ground

  • Robert Stalnaker


Artificial Intelligence Common Ground 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. Burton-Roberts, N.: 1989, The Limits to Debate: A Revised Theory of Semantic Presupposition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  2. Davis, S.: 1991, Pragmatics: A Reader, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
  3. Donnellan, K.: 1966, 'Reference and Definite Descriptions', Philosophical Review 75, 281–305. Reprinted in Davis (1991). Page references to Davis.Google Scholar
  4. Fagin, R., J. Halpern, Y. Moses, and M. Vardi: 1995, Reasoning About Knowledge, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  5. Gazdar, G.: 1979, Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Grice, P.: 1989, Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  7. Hintikka, J.: 1962, Knowledge and Belief, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  8. Karttunen, L.: 1974, 'Presupposition and Linguistic Context', Theoretical Linguistics 1, 181–194.Google Scholar
  9. Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1975, 'Conventional Implicature in Montague Grammar', Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 266–278.Google Scholar
  10. Kripke, S.:1979, 'Speaker's Reference and Semantic Reference', in P. French et al. (eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in the Philosophy of Language, pp. 6–27. Reprinted in Davis (1991). Page references to Davis.Google Scholar
  11. Kripke, S.: 1990, 'Presupposition and Anaphora: Remarks on the Formulation of the Projection Problem', Manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
  12. Langendoen, D. and H. Savin: 1971, 'The Projection Problem for Presuppositions', in C. Filmore and D. Langendoen (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Semantics, Holt, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, D.: 1969, Convention, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  14. Lewis, D.: 1979, 'Scorekeeping in a Language Game', Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 339–359. Reprinted in Davis (1991). Page references to Davis.Google Scholar
  15. Morgan, J.: 1969, 'On the Treatment of Presupposition in Transformational Grammar', Papers from the 5th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistics Society, 167–177.Google Scholar
  16. Schiffer, S.: 1972, Meaning, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  17. Soames, S.: 1982, 'How Presuppositions Are Inherited: A Solution to the Projection Problem', Linguistic Inquiry 13, 483–545. Reprinted in Davis (1991). Page references to Davis.Google Scholar
  18. Stalnaker, R.: 1970, 'Pragmatics', Synthese 22, 000–000.Google Scholar
  19. Stalnaker, R.: 1973, 'Presuppositions', Journal of Philosophical Logic 2, 447–457.Google Scholar
  20. Stalnaker, R.: 1974, 'Pragmatic Presuppositions', in M. Munitz and P. Under (eds.), Semantics and Philosophy, New York University Press, New York, pp. 197–213. Reprinted in Davis (1991) and in Stalnaker (1999). Page references to the latter.Google Scholar
  21. Stalnaker, R.: 1984, Inquiry, Bradford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  22. Stalnaker, R.: 1999, Context and Content, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  23. van der Sandt, R.: 1988, Context and Presupposition, Croom Helm, London.Google Scholar
  24. von Fintel, K.: 2000, 'What Is Presupposition Accommodation?' Manuscript, MIT.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Stalnaker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Linguistics and PhilosophyMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge

Personalised recommendations