Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers

Elbourne, Paul

doi:10.1007/s11098-017-0925-2

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here we will not further pursue this line of analysis: the most relevant observation 108 in the context of our paper is that the invariant relativizers deto/ što unambiguously bring about specific readings in both Bg and Cr. 17 See Elbourne (2018) for a general discussion and original examples after which ( 19) and ( 20) have been adapted. 18 The example (19d) is grammatical only if the relative clause contains a resumptive pronoun that co-refers with the head of the relative (the accusative clitic ga in this case).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selected Proceedings of the 14th Meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The volume is a collection of papers in diverse areas of Slavic linguistics, selected from the 14th annual meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society, held at the University of Potsdam on 11–13 September 2019. The volume is dedicated to Peter Kosta, longtime chair of Slavic linguistics at the Department of Slavic languages and literatures at the University of Potsdam, in recognition of his enormous contributions to the field. Contents: Publications of Peter Kosta – Vrinda Subhalaxmi Chidambaram: A Case of Parasitic Attrition: The disappearance of the degree morpheme -ьš in Bulgarian and Macedonian superlative adjectives – Steven Franks: Reflexive Typology, Movement, and the Structure of NP – Jadranka Gvozdanović:‘Have’ + infinitive in Czech: A long multilingual history – Iliyana Krapova and Tomislav Sočanac: Factivity in South Slavic languages: Complement and relative clauses – Alexander Letuchiy: ‘Missed TAM’: The lack of tense and mood marking in Russian argument conditionals – semantic and formal motivation – Franc Lanko Marušič and Rok Žaucer: Investigation of Slovenian copular agreement – James Joshua Pennington: Today’s Grammaticalization Theory is Yesterday’s Grammaticalization: The BCMS Future as An(other) Strike Against the Unidirectionality Hypothesis – Katrin Schlund: On the origin of East Slavic Elemental Constructions/Adversity Impersonals. Evidence from town chronicles of Old Rus’ – Luka Szucsich and Karolina Zuchewicz: Incrementality and (non)clausal complementation in Slavic – Alan Timberlake: String Syntax – Beata Trawiński: Polish żeby under Negation – Mladen Uhlik and Andreja Žele: Reflexive Possessive Pronouns in Slovene: A Contrastive Analysis with Russian – Vladislava Warditz: Structural Variation in Heritage Russian in Germany: Language Usage or Language Change? – Jacek Witkoś: On Some Aspects of Agree, Move and Bind in the Nominal Domain – Ilse Zimmermann†: On Pronouns Relating to Clauses

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selected Proceedings of the 14th Meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent detailed work on the semantics of definite descriptions has tended to reject the Russellian theory and advocate presuppositional theories (Hawthorne and Manley 2012;Elbourne 2013Elbourne , 2016Elbourne , 2018Schoubye 2013;Coppock and Beaver 2015). By the Russellian theory I mean the Russellian theory of definite descriptions as traditionally construed (Russell 1905), whereby a sentence of the form (1a) has the truth conditions in (1b) and these truth conditions are assumed to characterize the assertoric B Paul Elbourne paul.elbourne@magd.ox.ac.uk 1 Magdalen College, Oxford OX1 4AU, UK content of an utterance of that sentence; the definite description does not encode any presupposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The F is G. b. Assertoric content: a is G (where 'a' is a referential tag picking out the unique F, if such exists). c. Presupposition: There is exactly one F. Elbourne (2013Elbourne ( , 2016Elbourne ( , 2018 and Schoubye (2013). 4,5 In order to handle intensional and other complications, Elbourne (2013Elbourne ( , 2016 embeds the basic analysis in (2) in a situation semantics and Schoubye (2013) embeds it in a modal dynamic semantics; but these details will generally be passed over in the current article.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presupposition, assertion, and definite descriptions

Elbourne¹

2021

Linguist and Philos

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent work on the semantics of definite descriptions, some theorists (Elbourne in Definite descriptions, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013; Schoubye in Noûs 47(3):496–533, 2013) have advocated broadly Fregean accounts, whereby a definite description ‘the F’ introduces a presupposition to the effect that there is exactly one F and refers to it if there is, while other theorists (Abbott, in: Gundel, Hedberg (eds) Reference: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 61–72, 2008; Hawthorne and Manley in The reference book, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012) have advocated accounts whereby ‘the F’ introduces a presupposition to the effect that there is exactly one F but otherwise has the semantics of ‘an F’, introducing existential quantification. It is argued that the latter theories, since they have definite descriptions encode assertoric content to the effect that there is an F, have difficulty accounting for the felicity of ‘The F is G’ when it is already presupposed that there is an F.

show abstract

Coalescent theories and divergent paraphrases: definites, non-extensional contexts, and familiarity

Pupa

2021

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers

Cited by 4 publications

References 37 publications

Selected Proceedings of the 14th Meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society

Selected Proceedings of the 14th Meeting of the Slavic Linguistics Society

Presupposition, assertion, and definite descriptions

Coalescent theories and divergent paraphrases: definites, non-extensional contexts, and familiarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About