Free Choice in Deontic Inquisitive Semantics (DIS)

Aher, Martin

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_3

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 69 publications

(90 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notably, this rejection clause for the implication has not been previously studied in the context of Nelson's constructive logic with the strong negation. However, the clause has been used by Aher [1] to solve the free choice puzzle and (in a slightly adapted form) in recent work by Groenendijk and Roelofsen [8] on suppositional inquisitive semantics. The following proposition provides an intuition of rejection clauses for implication (notably, the finiteness of Prop must be used).…”

Section: Approximating Negative Inquisitive Meaning Of Implicationmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Avoiding Impossibility Theorems in Radical Inquisitive Semantics

Sano

2015

Modality, Semantics and Interpretations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In nonradical inquisitive semantics, an intuitionistic Kripke model captures how group knowledge increases throughout a conversation and allows the inquisitive meaning of a sentence to be derived from its classical meaning. In radical inquisitive semantics, as proposed by Groenendijk and Roelofsen, positive and negative ways of reacting to a proposal are captured by the positive and negative inquisitive meanings of a sentence, respectively, which are inductively defined without employing any Kripke-type semantics. This paper demonstrates that, in principle, it is impossible to provide any natural Kripke-type semantics under radical inquisitive semantics. Moreover, an alternative way to establish the semantics is proposed that avoids this negative result.

show abstract

Section: Approximating Negative Inquisitive Meaning Of Implicationmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Even if Groenendijk and Roelofsen's treatment of the English examples from (1) to (3) is not accepted, their definition of positive and negative inquisitive meanings [10] may be replaced by different Kripke-type semantics [12,13].…”

Section: Concluding Remarkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoiding Impossibility Theorems in Radical Inquisitive Semantics

Sano

2015

Modality, Semantics and Interpretations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among semantic theories of free choice effects, only Aloni 2007, Barker 2010, Aher 2012and Willer 2015 offer some account of DP. 2 However, none of these theories offer compelling accounts of WFC.…”

Section: Free Choices Hard Choicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expressing Permission

Starr

2016

SALT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a semantics for free choice permission that explains both the non-classical behavior of modals and disjunction in sentences used to grant permission, and their classical behavior under negation. It also explains why permissions can expire when new information comes in and why free choice arises even when modals scope under disjunction. On the proposed approach, deontic modals update preference orderings, and connectives operate on these updates rather than propositions. The success of this approach stems from its capacity to capture the difference between expressing the preferences that give rise to permissions and conveying propositions about those preferences.

show abstract

“…Any such attempt, though, still gives some of the classical assumptions in Fact 1. Finally, a few recent papers (Aher 2012;Starr 2016;Willer 2017a;Aloni 2018) have offered new semantics for negation, possibility, and disjunction that validate both Free Choice and Double…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Free choice and homogeneity

Goldstein

2019

S&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper develops a semantic solution to the puzzle of Free Choice permission. The paper begins with a battery of impossibility results showing that Free Choice is in tension with a variety of classical principles, including Disjunction Introduction and the Law of Excluded Middle. Most interestingly, Free Choice appears incompatible with a principle concerning the behavior of Free Choice under negation, Double Prohibition, which says that Mary can't have soup or salad implies Mary can't have soup and Mary can't have salad. Alonso-Ovalle 2006 and others have appealed to Double Prohibition to motivate pragmatic accounts of Free Choice. Aher 2012, Aloni 2018, and others have developed semantic accounts of Free Choice that also explain Double Prohibition.This paper offers a new semantic analysis of Free Choice designed to handle the full range of impossibility results involved in Free Choice. The paper develops the hypothesis that Free Choice is a homogeneity effect. The claim possibly A or B is defined only when A and B are homogenous with respect to their modal status, either both possible or both impossible. Paired with a notion of entailment that is sensitive to definedness conditions, this theory validates Free Choice while retaining a wide variety of classical principles except for the transitivity of entailment. The homogeneity hypothesis is implemented in two different ways, homogeneous alternative semantics and homogeneous dynamic semantics, with interestingly different consequences.

show abstract

Free Choice in Deontic Inquisitive Semantics (DIS)

Cited by 13 publications

References 69 publications

Avoiding Impossibility Theorems in Radical Inquisitive Semantics

Avoiding Impossibility Theorems in Radical Inquisitive Semantics

Expressing Permission

Free choice and homogeneity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About