Counterfactual de se

IF 1.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Hazel Pearson
{"title":"Counterfactual de se","authors":"Hazel Pearson","doi":"10.3765/SP.11.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper addresses a long-standing debate concerning the derivation of de se construals. One camp holds that there is a dedicated mechanism of ‘de se binding’, which results in a de se pronoun being interpreted as a variable ranging over the doxastic alternatives of the attitude holder (e.g. Chierchia 1990). Another treats de se as a special case of de re under the acquaintance relation of identity (e.g. Lewis 1979, Reinhart 1990). This debate is premised on the assumption that the two different routes to de se result in identical truth conditions. I argue that this assumption is incorrect for a class of cases that can be delineated in a principled fashion — counterfactual attitude reports involving counter-identity, such as Ivanka imagined that she was Melania and she was giving an interview . The argument builds on Ninan 2008, who noticed that de re construal works differently with counterfactual attitudes, and that this has consequences for de se interpretation in this type of sentence. I spell out these consequences more precisely, drawing on a novel, crosslinguistically robust generalization about unambiguously de se expressions such as PRO (the ‘De Se Generalization’). I argue that a treatment of such expressions that appeals to de se-as-de re cannot account for the De Se Generalization in a principled way, and hence that a dedicated mechanism of de se binding must be included among the expressive resources of the grammar. \n \nEARLY ACCESS","PeriodicalId":45550,"journal":{"name":"Semantics & Pragmatics","volume":"11 1","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Semantics & Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/SP.11.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This paper addresses a long-standing debate concerning the derivation of de se construals. One camp holds that there is a dedicated mechanism of ‘de se binding’, which results in a de se pronoun being interpreted as a variable ranging over the doxastic alternatives of the attitude holder (e.g. Chierchia 1990). Another treats de se as a special case of de re under the acquaintance relation of identity (e.g. Lewis 1979, Reinhart 1990). This debate is premised on the assumption that the two different routes to de se result in identical truth conditions. I argue that this assumption is incorrect for a class of cases that can be delineated in a principled fashion — counterfactual attitude reports involving counter-identity, such as Ivanka imagined that she was Melania and she was giving an interview . The argument builds on Ninan 2008, who noticed that de re construal works differently with counterfactual attitudes, and that this has consequences for de se interpretation in this type of sentence. I spell out these consequences more precisely, drawing on a novel, crosslinguistically robust generalization about unambiguously de se expressions such as PRO (the ‘De Se Generalization’). I argue that a treatment of such expressions that appeals to de se-as-de re cannot account for the De Se Generalization in a principled way, and hence that a dedicated mechanism of de se binding must be included among the expressive resources of the grammar. EARLY ACCESS
反事实的事实
本文讨论了一个长期以来关于概念解释推导的争论。一个阵营认为,存在一种专门的“de se binding”机制,这导致de se代词被解释为一个变量,范围涵盖态度持有者的多语替代词(例如Chiercia 1990)。另一种将de se视为身份熟人关系下de re的特例(如Lewis 1979、Reinhart 1990)。这场辩论的前提是假设两种不同的去本质途径会导致相同的真理条件。我认为,对于一类可以以原则的方式描述的案件来说,这种假设是不正确的——涉及反身份的反事实态度报告,比如伊万卡想象自己是梅拉尼娅,她正在接受采访。这一论点建立在尼南2008年的基础上,尼南注意到,反事实态度下的去解释作用不同,这对这类句子的去解释产生了影响。我更准确地阐述了这些后果,借鉴了一种新颖的、跨语言的、强有力的关于诸如PRO(“de se泛化”)等明确的de se表达式的概括。我认为,将这种表达方式作为de re来处理,不能以原则的方式解释de se泛化,因此,在语法的表达资源中必须包括一种专门的de se绑定机制。早期访问
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
50 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信