The Dynamics of Tense under Attitudes – Anaphoricity and de se Interpretation in the Backward Shifted Past

  • Corien Bary
  • Emar Maier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5447)


This paper shows that both anaphoricity and egocentric de se binding play a crucial role in the interpretation of tense in discourse. It uses the English backwards shifted reading of the past tense in a mistaken time scenario to bring out the tension between these two features. We provide a suitable representational framework for the observed clash in the form of an extension of DRT in which updates of the common ground are accompanied by updates of each relevant agent’s complex attitudinal state.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Asher, N.: Belief in discourse representation theory. Journal of Philosophical Logic 15(2), 127–189 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asher, N.: A typology for attitude verbs and their anaphoric properties. Linguistics and Philosophy 10(2), 125–197 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Geach, P.: Intentional identity Journal of Philosophy 74, 627–632 (1967)Google Scholar
  4. Geurts, B., Maier, E.: Layered DRT. ms (2003)Google Scholar
  5. Heim, I.: Presupposition projection and the semantics of attitude verbs. Journal of Semantics 9, 183–221 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hinrichs, E.: Temporal anaphora and discourses of English. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 63–82 (1986)Google Scholar
  7. Kamp, H.: Prolegomena to a structural account of belief and other attitudes. In: Anderson, C.A., Owens, J. (eds.) Propositional Attitudes: The Role of Content in Logic, Language, and Mind. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford (1990)Google Scholar
  8. Kamp, H., Reyle, U.: From Discourse to Logic: an Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics in Natural Language. In: Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory, vol. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)Google Scholar
  9. Kamp, H.: Temporal reference inside and outside propositional attitudes. In: von Heusinger, K., Turner, K. (eds.) Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics. Current Research in the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface, vol. 16, pp. 439–472. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  10. Karttunen, L.: Presupposition and linguistic context. Theoretical Linguistics, 181–194 (1974)Google Scholar
  11. Lewis, D.: Attitudes de dicto and de se. The Philosophical Review 88, 513–543 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Partee, B.: Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. Journal of Philosophy 70, 601–609 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Partee, B.H.: Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 7, 243–286 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Perry, J.: Frege on demonstratives. The Philosophical Review 86(4), 474–497 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. van der Sandt, R.: Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics 9, 333–377 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. von Stechow, A.: On the proper treatment of tense. In: Simons, M., Galloway, T. (eds.) Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory V, Ithaca, New York, Cornell University, pp. 362–386 (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Corien Bary
    • 1
  • Emar Maier
    • 2
  1. 1.Radboud University NijmegenNetherlands
  2. 2.ILLC/University of AmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations