Meaning postulates, inference, and the relational/notional ambiguity

Abstract

This paper in revised form appears in Facta Philosophica 5:1 (2003) 49­75. It addresses some problems about intensional transitives raised by Moltmann and Zimmerman, corrects some oversights in my paper in The Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (S.V. for 2002), and adds new material on binary vs. tripartite construals of “relational/notional”, bridge inferences, weakening inferences, and the relevance problem. Its other sections are, like the PASS paper, concerned with the conjunctive force of disjunctive NP complements of intensional transitive verbs: “Smith needs a good lawyer or a friendly judge” on its normal reading implies both “a good lawyer could help him” AND “a friendly judge could help him”. The reading on which “Smith needs a good lawyer or a friendly judge” is implied just by “Smith needs a good lawyer” (and so doesn’t imply a friendly judge could help him) is much less preferred, except when the disjunction is followed by a coda such as “and he doesn’t care which”.

Other Versions

original Forbes, Graeme (2003) "Meaning-Postulates, Inference,and the Relational/Notional Ambiguity". Facta Philosophica 5(1):49-74

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 105,824

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Intensionality: What are intensional transitives?Jennifer M. Saul - 2002 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):101–119.
IGraeme Forbes.Graeme Forbes - 2002 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):75-99.
Intensionality.Graeme Forbes & Jennifer Saul - 2002 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76:75-119.
An Investigation of a Gricean Account of Free-Choice or.Graeme Forbes - 2018 - In Keith Allan, Jay David Atlas, Brian E. Butler, Alessandro Capone, Marco Carapezza, Valentina Cuccio, Denis Delfitto, Michael Devitt, Graeme Forbes, Alessandra Giorgi, Neal R. Norrick, Nathan Salmon, Gunter Senft, Alberto Voltolini & Richard Warner, Further Advances in Pragmatics and Philosophy: Part 1 From Theory to Practice. Springer Verlag. pp. 65-79.
In Defense of an End-Relational Account of Goodness.Brian Coffey - 2014 - Dissertation, University of California, Davis
Lawyers’ Paradox.Mustafa M. Dagli - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 53:45-53.
Non-Relational Intentionality.Justin D'Ambrosio - 2017 - Dissertation, Yale University

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
40 (#625,976)

6 months
40 (#113,137)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Monotonicity in opaque verbs.Thomas Ede Zimmermann - 2006 - Linguistics and Philosophy 29 (6):715 - 761.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references