Advertisement

Varieties of Fiction Operators

  • Alberto VoltoliniEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology book series (PEPRPHPS, volume 20)

Abstract

In (2014), Mark Sainsbury has claimed, first, that there is a variety of fiction operators, in particular the “according to f”- operator and the “in f”- operator, whose semantic contribution to the complex sentences they contribute to generate is different, and second, that no worlds-based semantical treatment works for any of them. In this paper, I want to hold that, when suitably reinterpreted, Sainsbury is utterly right as to his first claim, yet just partially right as to his second claim.

References

  1. Bonomi, A. (1979). Universi di discorso. Milan: Feltrinelli.Google Scholar
  2. Deutsch, H. (2000). “Making Up Stories,” in A. Everett and T. Hofweber (eds.), Empty Names, Fiction and the Puzzles of Non-existence. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 149–181.Google Scholar
  3. Evans, G. (1982). The Varieties of Reference. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Jago, M. (2015). “Hyperintensional propositions”. Synthese 192: 585–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kaplan, D. (1989). “Demonstratives”. In J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 481–563.Google Scholar
  6. Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and Necessity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Predelli, S. (2005), Contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Predelli, S. (2008). “Modal Monsters and Talk about Fiction”. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37: 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Recanati, F. (2000). Oratio Obliqua, Oratio Recta. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sainsbury, R.M. (2009). Fiction and Fictionalism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Sainsbury, R.M. (2014). “Fictional Worlds and Fiction Operators”. In M. García-Carpintero and G. Martí (eds.), Empty Representations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Santambrogio, M. (1992). Forma e oggetto, Milan: Il Saggiatore.Google Scholar
  13. Schiffer, S. (1996). “Language-Created Language-Independent Entities”. Philosophical Topics 24: 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schiffer, S. (2003). The Things We Mean. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schlenker, P. (2003), “A Plea for Monsters”. Linguistic and Philosophy 26: 29–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Voltolini, A. (2006a). “Fiction as a Base of Interpretation Contexts”. Synthese 153: 23–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Voltolini, A. (2006b). How Ficta Follow Fiction. A Syncretistic Account of Fictional Entities. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Voltolini, A. (2011). “How Creationism Supports for Kripke’s Vichianism on Fiction”. In F. Lihoreau (ed.), Truth in Fiction. Munich: OntosVerlag, 93–106.Google Scholar
  19. Voltolini, A. (2013). “Probably the Charterhouse of Parma does not exist, possibly not even that Parma”. Humana Mente 25: 235–261.Google Scholar
  20. Voltolini, A. (2016). “The Nature of Fiction/al Utterances”. Kairos 17: 28–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Walton, K. (1990). Mimesis as Make Believe. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Education SciencesUniversity of TurinTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations