A usage-based approach to counterfactuality: optionality of the apodosis

Wolfgang Klein’s alternative analysis of counterfactuals is indeed much closer to the linguistic facts of English and related languages than what has been proposed within the philosophical tradition so far. This response to his article contends that Klein’s fresh look at counterfactuality paves the way for a pragmatic, usage-based approach to counterfactuals, which calls for a more varied analysis of the illocutionary force of counterfactual declarative sentences. As a second point, while Klein proposes that “counterfactuals do not require an ifclause” (p. 223), I will discuss authentic language data featuring independent counterfactual if-clauses, among others from English, and build the case that the reverse also holds, viz. that counterfactual conditionals do not require a main clause. The problem these data seem to pose to Klein’s account, however, is only an apparent one. Above all, they will be shown to highlight in turn the illocutionary versatility of declarative counterfactuals.