De JureCodesignation

Frege’s Puzzle Is Here to Stay: Triviality and Informativity in Natural Languages

“…The syntactic notion of name coordination we are invoking is not wholly original. Indeed, it can be seen as a restriction to proper names of what has been variously called 'strict coreference' (Fine 2007) 13 , 'grammatically determined coreference' (Fiengo and May 2006), 'explicit coreference' (Taylor 2015), and 'de jure codesignation' (Pryor 2017), and 'de jure coreference' (Pinillos 2011, Recanati 2012, 2016. All of these authors had a common goal in mind: characterizing that relation which holds between two representations when their co-reference is given for free, so to say.…”

Anaphoric Dependence and Logical Form

“…Iacona's arguments for this claim depend on what I take to be logical properties of relations of de jure (or internal) coreference (Fine 2007, Schroeter 2012, involving context-dependent expressions like indexicals and proper names, a topic that I have discussed in previous work (García-Carpintero 2004. The way Iacona appears to understand these issues (but, as the following pages will make clear, I am not sure I have understood it) suggests to me that he agrees to a large extent with Fodor (2008), Fiengo and May (2006), Heck (2012), Sainsbury and Tye (2012), Pryor (2017), and Schroeter and Schroeter (2016), who support deflationary, "syntactic" accounts of de jure coreference, in terms of a (syntactic) notion of logical form. As Sainsbury and Tye (2012: 87) put it, "data are to be explained by sameness and differences in vehicles of content, rather than sameness and differences in content".…”

Coordination, Content, and Conflation

“…In contrast, the relation discussed by Dickie, Gray, and Goodman is (I believe) the same relation that I have in mind. Also highly relevant isPryor [2016Pryor [ , 2017. The relation of coordination is closely related to notions like cognitive significance[Taschek 1995] and mental filing[Recanati 2012; Goodsell 2013].…”