Abstract
There is a thesis about syntax which is rather unpopular today. It says that logical form must be intimately connected with surface syntax of natural language. One of the protagonists of such a tenet was Richard Montague with his version of semantic syntax, which constructed syntax and semantics in a strictly parallel way. This leads to a strict form of a naturalness principle, according to which we must be prepared to treat the forms of natural language as they appear in natural language syntax without paraphrasing them away. There are constructions for which we can fulfill this requirement rather well, e.g. in the semantics of noun phrases as treated by Montague and Barwise & Cooper in their classical papers (cf. also Egli 1975). Note that the standard treatment by Frege and Russell paraphrased these noun phrase constructions with the help of more basic unrestricted quantifiers and connectives.
I thank the participants of the Konstanz Colloquium on “Reference and Anaphoric Relations” for their comments on the present paper. Special thanks are due Klaus von Heusinger for his penetrating remarks on the contents of the paper. I thank Ulf Friedrichsdorf for discussing dynamic predicate logic with me.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
von Arnim, H. 1964. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 4 Vols. Repr. Stuttgart: Teubner.
Bacon, J. 1985. The Completeness of a Predicate-Functor Logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50, 903–926.
Baldassarri, M. 1984-1987. La logica Stoica. Testimonianze e frammenti. Testi originali con introduzione e traduzione commentata. 8 Vols. Como: Noseda.
Barwise, J. & Cooper, R. 1981. Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 159–219.
Beth, E. 1968. The Foundations of Mathematics. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Church, A. 1940. Formulation of the Simple Theory of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 5, 56–68.
Egli, U. 1974. Ansätze zur Integration der Semantik in die Grammatik. Kronberg/Taunus: Scriptor.
Egli, U. 1979. The Stoic Concept of Anaphora. In: R. Bäuerle & U. Egli & A. von Stechow (eds.). Semantics from Different Points of View. Berlin: Springer, 266–283.
Egli, U. 1983. The Stoic Theory of Arguments. In: R. Bäuerle & C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow (eds.). Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Egli, U. 1986. Stoic Syntax and Semantics. Historiographia Linguistica 13, 281–306.
Egli, U. 1993. Neue Elemente im Bild der stoischen Logik. In: K. Döring & T. Ebert (eds.). Dialektiker und Stoiker. Zur Logik der Stoa und ihrer Vorläufer. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 129–139.
Egli, U. & Bäuerle, R. 1985. Anapher, Nominalphrase und Eselssätze. Arbeitspapier 105. Sonderforschungsbereich 99, Universität Konstanz.
Geach, P. 1962. Reference and Generality. An Examination of Some Medieval and Modern Theories. Ithaca/NY: Cornell University Press.
Groenendijk, J. & Stokhof, M. 1991. Dynamic Predicate Logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100.
Heim, I. 1983. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Distributed by Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.
Heim, I. 1990. E-Type Pronouns and Donkey Anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 137–177.
Henkin, L. 1950. Completeness in the Logic of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 15, 81–91.
Hülser, K. 1987-88. Die Fragmente zur Dialektik der Stoiker. 4 Vols. Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog.
Kripke, S. 1967. Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I. Normal Propositional Calculi. Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9, 67–96.
Leblanc, H. 1976. Truth-Value Semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Leblanc, H. 1983. Alternatives to First-Order Semantics. In: D. Gabbay & F. Guenthner (eds.). Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Vol.1. Elements of Classical Logic. Dordrecht: Reidel, 189–274.
Long, A. & Sedley, D. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers. 2 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
May, R. 1985. Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press.
Montague, R. 1974. Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague. Ed. and with an introd. by R. Thomason. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Muskens, R. 1991. Anaphora and the Logic of Change. In: J. van Eijck (ed.). Logics in AI. Berlin: Springer, 412–427.
Neale, S. 1990. Descriptions. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press.
Partee, B. 1984. Nominal and Temporal Anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 7, 243–286.
Sharpies, R. (ed.) 1991. Cicero: On Fate (‘De Fato’) & Boethius: The Consolation of Philosophy ( ‘Philosophiae Consolationis’). Warminster/England: Aris & Phillips Ltd.
Smullyan, R. 1968. First-Order Logic. Berlin: Springer.
von Stechow, A. 1974. ε-λ-kontextfreie Sprachen. Ein Beitrag zu einer natürlichen formalen Semantik. Linguistische Berichte 34, 1–33.
Wallies, M. 1883. Alexandri in Aristoteles Analyticorum Priorum Librum I Commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.
Windisch, E. 1868. Untersuchungen §ber den Ursprung des Relativpronomens in den indogermanischen Sprachen. In: G. Curtius (ed.). Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik. Vol. 2. Leipzig: S. Hirzel 203–419. Reprint: Hildesheim: Olms (1972).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Egli, U. (2000). Anaphora from Athens to Amsterdam. In: von Heusinger, K., Egli, U. (eds) Reference and Anaphoric Relations. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol 72. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3947-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3947-2_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0291-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3947-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive