Abstract
In this paper we present an alternative interpretation of statements of epistemic possibility, which does not induce a consistency test on a common ground, as in , but which tests whether the possibility is supported by some update of the common ground, as in . The information space relative to which such claims are evaluated are taken to consist in the possible developements of a discourse in action. It is shown that this notion of Might not only behaves better logically and pragmatically speaking, but that it also allows for non-trivial attitude reports and questions about epistemic possibilities. These epistemic modal statements can also be understood to guide or focus the inquisitive actions of the discourse participants.
Keywords
- Information State
- Common Ground
- Actual World
- Consistency Test
- Epistemic Modality
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brumwell, C.: A Dynamic Analysis of Epistemic Possibility. Master’s thesis, ILLC, Universiteit van Amsterdam (2009)
Ciardelli, I., Groenendijk, J., Roelofsen, F.: Might and Free Choice in Inquisitive Semantics. In: Proceedings of SALT 18, Ohio State University, Ohio (2009)
Dekker, P.: Contexts for Questions. In: Hunyadi, L., Rákosi, G., Tóth, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium of Logic and Language, pp. 47–58. University of Debrecen, Debrecen (2004)
Dekker, P.: Optimal Inquisitive Discourse. In: Aloni, M., Butler, A., Dekker, P. (eds.) Questions in Dynamic Semantics, CRiSPI 17, pp. 83–101. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)
Gillies, A., von Fintel, K.: CIA Leaks. The Philosophical Review 117, 77–98 (2008)
Ginzburg, J.: Resolving Questions, I & II. Linguistics and Philosophy 18(5,6), 459–527, 567–609 (1995)
Groenendijk, J.: The Logic of Interrogation. In: Aloni, M., Butler, A., Dekker, P. (eds.) Questions in Dynamic Semantics. CRiSPI 17, pp. 43–62. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)
Hulstijn, J.: Structured Information States. Raising and Resolving Issues. In: Benz, A., Jäger, G. (eds.) Proceedings of MunDial 1997, pp. 99–117. University of Munich (1997)
Kratzer, A.: What Must and Can Must and Can Mean. Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (1977)
Landman, F.: Towards a Theory of Information. Foris, Dordrecht (1986)
Roberts, C.: Information structure in discourse. In: Yoon, J.H., Kathol, A. (eds.) Working Papers in Linguistics 49, pp. 91–136. Ohio State University (1996)
van Rooy, R.: Questioning to resolve decision problems. Linguistics and Philosophy 26, 727–763 (2003)
Roussarie, L.: What might be known: epistemic modality and uncertain contexts. In: Journées Sémantique and Modélisation (JSM 2009), Paris (2009)
Stalnaker, R.: Assertion. In: Cole, P. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics 9 – Pragmatics, pp. 315–332. Academic Press, New York (1978)
Veltman, F.: Data Semantics. In: Groenendijk, J., Janssen, T., Stokhof, M. (eds.) Truth, Interpretation and Information, pp. 43–63. Foris, Dordrecht (1984)
Veltman, F.: Defaults in Update Semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25(3), 221–261 (1996)
Yalcin, S.: Modality and Inquiry. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dekker, P.J.E. (2010). There Is Something about Might . In: Aloni, M., Bastiaanse, H., de Jager, T., Schulz, K. (eds) Logic, Language and Meaning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6042. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14287-1_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14287-1_25
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-14286-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-14287-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)