恢复行为假说?

IF 0.7 2区哲学 Q1 Arts and Humanities

Thought-A Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-06-21 DOI:10.1002/tht3.501

Peter Elswyk

{"title":"恢复行为假说?","authors":"Peter Elswyk","doi":"10.1002/tht3.501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A traditional problem with the performative hypothesis is that it cannot assign proper truth-conditions to a declarative sentence. This paper shows that the problem is solved by adopting a multidimensional semantics on which sentences have more than just truth-conditions. This is good news for those who want to at least partially revive the hypothesis. The solution also brings into focus a lesson about what issues to consider when drawing the semantics/pragmatics boundary.","PeriodicalId":44963,"journal":{"name":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/tht3.501","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reviving the performative hypothesis?\",\"authors\":\"Peter Elswyk\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/tht3.501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A traditional problem with the performative hypothesis is that it cannot assign proper truth-conditions to a declarative sentence. This paper shows that the problem is solved by adopting a multidimensional semantics on which sentences have more than just truth-conditions. This is good news for those who want to at least partially revive the hypothesis. The solution also brings into focus a lesson about what issues to consider when drawing the semantics/pragmatics boundary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/tht3.501\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.501\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.501","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

执行性假设的一个传统问题是它不能为陈述句指定适当的真值条件。本文通过采用一个多维语义来解决这个问题，在这个语义上，句子不仅仅具有真值条件。对于那些希望至少部分恢复这一假说的人来说，这是个好消息。该解决方案还提供了一个教训，即在绘制语义/语用边界时需要考虑哪些问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Reviving the performative hypothesis?

A traditional problem with the performative hypothesis is that it cannot assign proper truth-conditions to a declarative sentence. This paper shows that the problem is solved by adopting a multidimensional semantics on which sentences have more than just truth-conditions. This is good news for those who want to at least partially revive the hypothesis. The solution also brings into focus a lesson about what issues to consider when drawing the semantics/pragmatics boundary.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Thought-A Journal of Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Thought: A Journal of Philosophy is dedicated to the publication of short (of less than 4500 words), original, philosophical papers in the following areas: Logic, Philosophy of Maths, Philosophy of Mind, Epistemology, Philosophy of Language, Metaphysics, and Value Theory. All published papers will be analytic in style. We intend that readers of Thought will be exposed to the most central and significant issues and positions in contemporary philosophy that fall under its remit. We will publish only papers that exemplify the highest standard of clarity. Thought aims to give a response to all authors within eight weeks of submission. Thought employs a triple-blind review system: the author''s identity is not revealed to the editors and referees, and the referee''s identity is not revealed to the author. Every submitted paper is appraised by the Subject Editor of the relevant subject area. Papers that pass to the editors are read by at least two experts in the relevant subject area.