Semantic Verbs Are Intensional Transitives

Abstract

In this paper I show that we have strong empirical and theoretical reasons to treat the verbs we use in our semantic theorizing-particularly 'refers (to)', 'applies (to)', and 'is true (of )'-as intensional transitive verbs (ITVs). Stating our semantic theories with intensional vocabulary allows us to partially reconcile two competing approaches to the nature and subject-matter of semantics: the Chomskian approach, on which semantics is non-relational, internalistic, and concerns the psychology of language users, and the Lewisian approach, on which semantics is fully relational, specifies truth-conditions, and has metaphysical implications. ITVs have two readings: an intensional, de dicto reading, and a relational, de re reading. A semantic theory stated with the de dicto readings of our semantic verbs captures the core insights of the Chomskian approach to semantics, in part because it allows us to assign extremely fine-grained semantic values to expressions, even when those expressions are empty. On the other hand, the de re reading yields a theory that is fully relational, and issues in truth-conditions. The resulting theories are relatedand compatible-in that they are expressed by two different readings of the very same semantic vocabulary, and plausibly, the distinction between these two readings is one of scope.

Intensionality, Reference and Games of Partial Information I. Intensional Transitive Verbs

“…A transitive verb is a verb that, in the surface syntax of a sentence, is accompanied by a direct object. Assuming that a sentence's structure is typologically displayed by its constituents' order, a transitive verb is extensional just in case it validates inter alia the following inferences: A verb which admits interpretations invalidating at least one of the inferential schemes displayed above is an intensional one (Abbott, 2010(Abbott, , 2011D'Ambrosio, 2017;Forbes, 2006Forbes, , 2013Moltmann, 1997Moltmann, , 2008Recanati, 2000;Schwarz, 2015). The class of verbs which exhibit intensionality is divided into verbs which admit, in their object position, sentential complements, frequently noun clauses, and verbs whose nonsentential complements consist in noun phrases.…”

“…Usually, the intensional transitive erbs (ITVs) nomenclature is reserved only for the latter verbs. The v semantic peculiarities of an ITV can be best seen when its inferential behaviour is contrasted with that of a transitive verb which complies with the requirements of extensionality (Abbott, 2010(Abbott, , 2011D'Ambrosio, 2017;Forbes, 2006Forbes, , 2013Moltmann, 1997;Schwarz, 2015). In this sense, consider the following sentence:…”

“…In this sense, the truth of (2) is insulated from the existence of the entity mentioned by the linguistic material which occupies the verb's object position. Insofar as the sentences with ITVs have readings in which the existence is semantically inert, they fail to inferentially generate existential entailment (Abbott, 2010(Abbott, , 2011D'Ambrosio, 2017;Forbes, 2006Forbes, , 2013Moltmann, 1997;Schwarz, 2015). If we substitute a representational verb, like "think (about)", "refer (to)", "talk (about)", "represent", "portray", "draw" or "paint", for the verb which occurs in the sentence (2), the newly generated sentential contexts will also be unfriendly to existential quantification (D'Ambrosio, 2017;Moltmann, 1997Moltmann, , 2008Schwarz, 2015).…”

“…What the last examples show is that an ITV permits readings in which the substitution salva veritate of the coextensional items, in the verb's complement, is blocked. In this sense, the intensional verbal constructions are referentially opaque in object position (Abbott, 2010(Abbott, , 2011D'Ambrosio, 2017;Forbes, 2006Forbes, , 2013Kaplan, 1968;Moltmann, 1997;Quine, 1956;Recanati, 2000;Schwarz, 2015). In contrast, the sentences formed with extensional transitive verbs never license readings which violate the inferential pattern of substitution.…”

“…As the complements of the extensional transitive verbs do not resist the substitution salva veritate of the coreferential expressions, these verbs are, in contradistinction to ITVs, referentially transparent in object position (Abbott, 2010(Abbott, , 2011D'Ambrosio, 2017;Forbes, 2006Forbes, , 2013Moltmann, 1997;Quine, 1956;Recanati, 2000;Schwarz, 2015).…”