Advertisement

Knowing Who: How Perspectives and Context Interact

  • Maria Aloni
  • Bruno Jacinto
Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 369)

Abstract

In this article we investigate how conceptual perspectives and context interact in the determination of the truth of sentences in which ‘knowing-wh’ constructions occur.

Keywords

Conceptual perspectives Knowing-wh Perpective-sensitive semantics Knowledge attributions Semantics of questions 

References

  1. Aloni, M. (2001). Quantification under conceptual covers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  2. Braun, D. (2006). Now you know who Hong Oak Yun is. Philosophical Issues, 16(1), 24–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Breheny, R. (2006). Non-specific specifics and the source of existential closure of exceptional-scope indefinites. UCLWPiL, 18, 1–35.Google Scholar
  4. Grice, P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  5. Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1984). Studies on the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Kaplan, D. (1989a). Afterthoughts. In J. Almog, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kaplan, D. (1989b). Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kratzer, A. (1998). Scope or pseudo-scope: Are there wide-scope indefinites? In Rothstein, S. (Ed.) Events in grammar (pp. 163–196). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. MacFarlane, J. (2005a). The assessment sensitivity of knowledge attributions. In T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Oxford studies in epistemology (Vol. 1, pp. 197–233). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. MacFarlane, J. (2005b). Making sense of relative truth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 105, 321–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Partee, B. (1989). Binding implicit variables in quantified contexts. In Papers from CLS 25. Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
  12. Récanati, F. (2002). Unarticulated constituents. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25, 299–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Reinhart, T. (1997). Quantifier-scope: How labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 20, 335–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schwarzschild, R. (2002). Singleton indefinites. Journal of Semantics, 19(3), 289–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Pragmatics (Vol. 9). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  16. Stanley, J. (2000). Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy, 23(4), 391–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stanley, J. (2005). Review of François Récanati’s Literal Meaning. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 9. http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24857-literal-meaning/.
  18. Winter, Y. (1997). Choice functions and the scopal semantics of indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy, 20, 399–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ILLC/Department of PhilosophyUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Arché – Philosophical Research Centre for Logic, Language, Metaphysics and EpistemologyThe University of St AndrewsFifeScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations