slides from 1-30-2023

pptx

School

University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

100

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

pptx

Pages

31

Uploaded by ElderSeaLion3284

Report
Reference and Holding True In order to use this analysis to explain the meanings of sentences, we will need to develop theories of the concepts it appeals to: • What is involved in referring to a particular group or individual, and what constraints are there on which words or phrases can be used to refer to which groups or individuals? • How is it that a predicate can hold true of certain groups/individuals but not others, and how does this relate to knowledge of language users? A simple analysis of what subject-predicate sentences mean: • The subject is used to refer to a particular individual or group. • The predicate holds true of certain individuals and/or groups, but not of others. • The sentence as a whole means that the predicate holds true of the group or individual referred to by the subject.
Reference and Holding True • What is involved in referring to a particular group or individual, and what constraints are there on which words or phrases can be used to refer to which groups or individuals? • How is it that a predicate can hold true of certain groups/individuals but not others, and how does this relate to knowledge of language users? These are both complex topics, to which we will return in more detail later in the course. But it is worth considering them both in a preliminary way now…
Referring & Indexicality Which individual or group a NP refers to depends heavily on the pragmatic context in which it is used. • This is most evident in the case of pronouns: The first person singular pronoun I refers to the speaker; the second person singular pronoun you refers to the addressee, etc. – So in a context where John is speaking, the sentence I am an ostrich means that John is an ostrich; – But in a context where Mary is speaking, the sentence I am an ostrich means that Mary is an ostrich. • Terms whose reference varies according to context in this way are called indexical expressions.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Indexicality & Propositions • Of course in some sense, the pronoun I means the same thing for everyone, and so does the sentence I am an ostrich . • But the fact that the pronoun refers to different individuals in different contexts means that the sentence is used in different contexts to make different claims — or, as we will put it, to assert different propositions . • Part of the analysis of the meanings of sentences is formulating principles to determine which proposition a given sentence expresses in which contexts.
Indexicality & Speaker Intentions • In the case of third person pronouns, the reference may fixed in part by the intentions of the speaker . – If John says She is asleep , his use of she might refer to Mary, or Susan, or any other female individual. Which one seems to be matter of who John intends to refer to. – As in the previous example, we regard his utterance as asserting a different proposition if he is referring to Mary than it does if he is referring to Susan. In some sense, the meaning of the sentence is the same in either case, but different claims are made. • Proper names show a similar pattern: – If John says Mary is asleep , his use of Mary might refer to Mary Smith or Mary Jones, or any other person named Mary . Which one seems again to depend on John’s intentions. – Just as before, we regard a use of Mary is asleep to assert that Mary Smith is asleep as expressing a different proposition from a use of this same sentence to assert that Mary Jones is asleep.
Grammatical Constraints on Reference • Although reference is fixed in part by the intentions of the speaker, rules of the language place constraints on which entities a given word or phrase can be used to refer to. • For example, it is conventionally used only to refer to inanimate objects and animals (other than “favored” animals like pets) — so if a speaker uses it while clearly intending to refer to a person, the effect is anomalous (probably insulting). • Using other pronouns to refer to entities that do not match the person, number and gender features of the pronoun is also perceived as a violation as the rules of the language. • The referent of a complex phrase such as the egg that John threw at Fred is often so tightly constrained by the meanings of the words and grammatical constructions involved that speaker intentions may play no role. • We will need to formulate lexical entries and compositional rules so that in all these kinds of cases, they impose constraints on reference that match the intuitions of native speakers about how the words are normally used.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Predicates & “Holding True” In the case of a simple predicate consisting of a single lexical item, let us assume (for now) that speakers know a criterion of application for the predicate — a condition which an individual or group must meet in order for the predicate to hold true of it. • For example, we might define a predicate like blink roughly as follows: For any given individual or group x : blink holds true of x (at a given time t ) iff x ’s eyes are closed at t , but open immediately before and after t . Iff is an abbreviation for “if and only if.”
Predicates & “Holding True” • We will look at this way of explaining predicate meaning in detail shortly, and will also examine several alternative approaches. It is arguably problematic in certain ways, but let us delay consideration of problems until later… • Complex predicates (phrases built up from smaller parts) will also have criteria of application, but we will need to derive them from the meanings of their constituent lexical items by compositional rule.
Holding True & Homophony We should recognize that a language may include homophonous (distinct but identically pronounced) lexical items, including predicates. • For example, there are two distinct verbs stick , one meaning “put so as to be unable to move” and the other meaning “pierce.”
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Holding True & Homophony Larger phrases containing homophonous items may themselves be homophonous. • Hence, there are two distinct verb phrases, both pronounced “stuck John in the belly,” each with its own separate criterion of application: – For any given x : stuck 1 John in the belly holds of x iff x put John in the belly in a way that prevented John from moving. – For any given x : stuck 2 John in the belly holds of x iff x pierced John’s belly.
Holding True & Homophony It would be a mistake to give a single criterion of application intended to cover both phrases: • For any given x : stuck John in the belly holds of x iff x put John in the belly in a way that prevented John from moving, and/or x pierced John’s belly. Just as with cases of indexicality, we consider homophonous sentences to express different propositions, depending on which of the identically pronounced expressions they contain. • For example Mary stuck John in the belly expresses one proposition if it contains the verb stuck meaning “put so as to be unable to move” and a different proposition if it contain the verb stuck meaning “pierce” (even when the referents of the names John and Mary are kept constant).
Holding True & Polysemy Standardly but more controversially, we also recognize cases where a single item has more than one meaning, or polysemy . • For example, the word day has at least three different senses: – The period from sunrise to sunset – The period from midnight to midnight – Any arbitrary 24-hour period
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Holding True & Polysemy • Most semanticists would not analyze this as three different words, all pronounced “day,” but as one word with three meanings. • However, it is notoriously difficult to identify reliable criteria for distinguishing polysemy from homophony, and some semanticists deny the distinction. • Regardless, the result is that a phrase like walked for a day should be analyzed as having three separate criteria of application (one for each sense), rather than a single criterion of application stated in terms of three separate possibilities.
Holding True & Ambiguity • For any given x , walked for a day 1 holds of x iff x walked from sunrise to sunset. • For any given x , walked for a day 2 holds of x iff x walked from midnight to midnight. • For any given x , walked for a day 3 holds of x iff x walked for 24 hours. NOT: • For any given x , walked for a day holds of x iff x walked from sunrise to sunset, or from midnight to midnight, or for 24 hours. Three different propositions are expressed by the sentence John walked for a day (even if the referent of the name John is kept constant).
Ambiguity Terminology: The term ambiguity is used to cover both homophony and polysemy . A form is ambiguous if it has more than one distinct meaning (whether because it is the form of multiple expressions which are pronounced identically, or the form of a single expression with multiple senses). • Reminder: this technical sense of ambiguity is different from its meaning in everyday usage, where it often simply means “unclear.”
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Indexicality, Ambiguity, & Propositions It is not unusual for a sentence to contain both ambiguity and indexicality. The result is that a single sentence can be used to express any number of different propositions, depending on how the indexical expressions are anchored and how the ambiguities are resolved. • For example, the sentence John lies in his bed can be used to assert any of a large number of different propositions, depending on whether lies means “recline” or “tell an untruth with the intent to deceive,” and on which person or people the speaker is referring to with the name John and the pronoun his .
Testing for Ambiguity • In some cases, it may be unclear whether an expression is ambiguous, or instead simply has a single very general meaning. – For example, the noun field can be used for the playing area of a game such as football, or for cleared land used to grow crops. Are these two different senses of the word, or are they both covered under a single more general sense? • There is no simple, 100%-reliable way to decide this kind of question. Instead, we must always examine carefully which answer allows for the simplest, most explanatory, and most accurately predictive overall analysis. • But there are some more-or-less standard “tests” that can be used as evidence in arguing that an item is (or is not) ambiguous. – Two of the most popular are the zeugma test , and the comparative ellipsis test .
Coordinate Structures A little bit of terminology to understand the zeugma test: A coordinate structure is a phrase consisting of two or more expressions linked by and , or , or but (or any other similar word). These expressions are called the conjuncts . For example: John found a worm and put it in his pocket We wished for but never received a million- dollar donation. [ ] These are coordinate structures. [ ] These are the conjuncts.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Zeugma • A zeugma is a construction in which a coordinate structure is placed together in a sentence with an ambiguous expression, but each conjunct makes sense with only with a different meaning of the ambiguous item. – For example: John called Mary a cab and Bill a fool . • Here, call is the ambiguous item: It has one meaning roughly the same as “summon,” and another meaning roughly like “describe as.” • The coordinate structure is Mary a cab and Bill a fool . One conjunct is Mary a cab and the other conjunct is Bill a fool . • But pragmatically, it would be very strange for someone to describe Mary as a cab, or to summon a fool for Bill, so each conjunct makes sense only with a different meaning of call . • The result is that the sentence sounds strange or funny. Zeugmas are often used as jokes.
Setting up the Zeugma Test • We can use zeugmas to “test” whether a particular item is ambiguous, or just has a single very general meaning. • For example, suppose we were unsure whether the word parent was ambiguous (between one meaning where it is synonymous with mother and a separate meaning where it is synonymous with father ), or instead had just a single meaning broad enough to cover both mothers and fathers. • Hypothesis 1: parent , Sense A: “mother”; parent , Sense B: “father.” • Hypothesis 2: parent , just one sense: “mother or father.” • In using the zeugma test, you should always identify two hypotheses this way, and identify two (or more) senses which the item has under one hypothesis, which are conflated in the other.
• Place the item you want to test in a sentence with a coordinate construction. • The test item should be in a different part of the sentence — not inside the coordinate construction itself. • Ideally, each conjunct should make sense only with what would be a different sense of the test item, under the hypothesis that the item is ambiguous: – [ John and Mary ] are Bill’s parent s . • Under Hypothesis 1 (where we claim that parent is ambiguous between “father” and “mother”) John makes sense only with Sense A (where parent means “father”) and Mary makes sense only with Sense B (where parent means “mother”) — assuming typical genders for the names. Setting up the Zeugma Test
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Zeugma Test • Next, check native speaker intuitions about the sentence. Can the test item be understood as compatible with Sense A with respect to one conjunct, but compatible with Sense B with respect to the other conjunct, without the sentence sound strange or like a joke? – [ John and Mary ] are Bill’s parent s . Can parent be understood as compatible with John being Bill’s father, and also compatible with Mary being Bill’s mother, without the sentence sounding odd or joke- like? father mother • If the sentence does not sound odd or joke-like, that is evidence that the test item is not ambiguous between Sense A and Sense B, but instead has a single, general meaning that covers both. • In this example, native speakers agree that the sentence is not odd or joke-like, so we may conclude that parent has a single meaning that is compatible with both mothers and fathers, rather than being ambiguous between one meaning where it is synonymous with mother and a separate meaning where it is synonymous with father .
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Zeugma Test • Contrast this with a different example: the verb smell. • Hypothesis 1: Sense A: “perceive a scent” Sense B: “emit a scent” • Hypothesis 2: just one sense: “perceive or emit a scent” • Place smell in a sentence with a coordinate structure, where one conjunct makes sense with perceiving a scent and the other makes sense with emitting a scent: – John smells [ like a flower and with his nose ]. perceive emit In this example, most speakers find that the sentence does sound odd or joke-like, so we conclude that smell is ambiguous in the way suggested.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Caution • Caution: In setting up the test, be careful not to use an example that sounds odd for independent reasons, such as a conflict in number. – [ The parent of that child] is [ John and Mary ]. father mother • This example sounds odd even though parent is not ambiguous, because the determiner the forces the phrase the parent of that child to refer to just one individual. • Assuming John and Mary are two different people, they cannot both be the identical to referent of the parent of that child . • Using this sort of example throws off the results of the test. Be careful to avoid it.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The Theoretical Basis for the Test • Why does the test work? • Because the proposition expressed by a sentence is determined compositionally . • Except in special cases like jokes, puns, and deliberate double-entendres, each syntactic constituent makes one contribution to that proposition. So if an ambiguous word appears only once, only one of its senses plays a role in determining what proposition is expressed. – He smells [like a flower and with his nose]. Because the word smell appears just once in this sentence, just one sense of smell can be used in building a proposition from this sentence (without it sounding like a joke). The same point also holds true with respect to reference . There is just one occurrence of the pronoun he in this sentence, so it contributes just one referent to the proposition. The sentence cannot mean that John smells like a flower and Bill smells with his nose. That is, indexicality patterns like ambiguity in the zeugma test .
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The Comparative Ellipsis Test • A related test, which works very much like the zeugma test, is the comparative ellipsis test . • Comparative ellipsis is a construction in which the comparative form of an adjective or adverb combines with a phrase headed by the complementizer than . – John is faster than Mary . • In most such examples (though not all), the phrase headed by than is equivalent to a whole clause, similar to the clause containing the adjective or adverb, and is usually analyzed as deriving syntactically from such a clause by deleting all material which is identical to material from that clause. – John is fast er than Mary is fast . Comparative form of the adjective fast Phrase headed by than Identical, so delete occurrence in than clause
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Setting up the Comparative Ellipsis Test • The deleted material normally must be interpreted in the same way as the identical material in the other clause. Referring expressions must have the same reference, predicates must have the same sense, etc. • We can use this fact to test whether particular items are ambiguous, in much the same way as we used the zeugma test. • If you are trying to test whether an item is ambiguous between Sense A and Sense B, or instead just has a single sense compatible with both, place it in the part of the than- clause which will be deleted. But set up the two clauses in such a way that one of them makes sense only with Sense A, and the other makes sense only with Sense B. • Then delete the identical material and check whether the resulting sentence sounds odd or joke-like. If it does, that is evidence the item is ambiguous. If it doesn’t, that suggests it is not ambiguous.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Comparative Ellipsis Test • For example, suppose we are unsure whether the word sad has two senses as in Hypothesis 1, or just one more general sense as in Hypothesis 2: • Hypothesis 1 : sad , Sense A: “experiencing sadness” – as in John is really sad, because he lost his favorite hat. sad , Sense B: “tending to cause sadness” – as in That movie was so sad; I was crying all through it. • Hypothesis 2: sad , just one sense: “experiencing and/or tending to cause sadness”
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Comparative Ellipsis Test • Set up a comparative ellipsis sentence. Put sad in the part to be deleted (and in the identical part of the previous clause). Ideally, make sure one clause favors an interpretation where sad is understood as “experiencing sadness” and the other clause favors an interpretation where sad is understood as “causing sadness.” – John is sad der than Titanic is sad . • Then delete the repeated material from the than -clause, and check native-speaker intuitions whether sad can be understood in these two ways with respect to the two subject, without sounding odd or like a joke. Titanic causes sadness John experiences sadness
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Comparative Ellipsis Test John is sadder than Titanic . • Most speakers agree that this example sounds like a joke. (or if not, that the first clause must be interpreted as meaning that John is so pitiful as to cause sadness, not as meaning that he experiences sadness). • We conclude that sad is ambiguous in the way suggested.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the Comparative Ellipsis Test • A different example: bake — “heat in an oven” (as in John baked the potato ) vs. “create by heating in an oven” (as in John baked the cake ). Ambiguous between two senses, or just one general sense? – John baked the cake faster than John baked the potato fast. • Most speakers accept this sentence as meaning that the cake-baking took less time than the potato-baking, even if the cake was created by the baking and the potato wasn’t. • We conclude that bake has a single, general meaning that is compatible both the creation by baking and with baking of pre-existing objects.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

Case 3 .docx
slides from 1-18-2023.pptx
202309 Professional Ethics - ECE592A.pdf
Ethical Primer.rtf
SC_EX365_2021_6b_NeidaCaro-Boone_2.xlsx
13 - Leadership Ethics 1 - Fall.pdf
Bevans p7-14-1.pdf
Affirmative Action.docx
Bus_Comm_Wk5_discussion.docx
Reflection Essay.docx
I stare at the clock, tick-tocking, wondering if I did well on my tests and if I should have taken m
Research & Reflection.docx

Browse Popular Homework Q&A

Q: The matrix has eigenvalues –5, 1, and 2. Find its eigenvectors. The eigenvalue -5 has associated…
Q: 3. Preparing simple balance sheets Renata is the owner of an orange factory. The following…
Q: 3. For the circuit given below, write loop equations and compute the current through R3. R₁ 10 Ω 10V…
Q: understand most of the logic behind the code, but the indentations and organizing is where I get…
Q: what are the final answers
Q: 4. Does the series Σn=2 (-1)" √n converge? Why?
Q: For the following set of scores: 30 69 41 51 36 53 60 24 55 44 61 25 74 63 55 13 42 56 54 49 a. I…
Q: Identify 3 factors that contribute to achieving spatial maturity in an organization. Vague business…
Q: Crest Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.…
Q: 6. For the following scores, X 11 3 5 6 5 Y 1 15 7 8 9 a. Compute SS for X and Y and SP. b. Compute…
Q: . Is dx = C₁(T)dT+ dV nRT V an exact or inexact differential? The quantity C, (T) is simply an…
Q: ast quarter of 2021 and the first month of 2022. The only securities held by Amalgamated at October…
Q: Calculate the entropy change of the universe (J/mol-K) when the entropy change of the system is 75.4…
Q: On July 1, Ayayai Corporation purchases 650 shares of its $5 par value common stock for the treasury…
Q: Linux, write down the commands
Q: Exercise 1. 1) In a metric space (X, d), show that any closed ball B(x,r), with x X and r≥0 is…
Q: ΔG° for the reaction shown is equal to -698.9 (kJ/mol). Use the information given in the table to…
Q: Which fat soluble vitamin or vitamins are rich in the following lunch food items?   Write in the…
Q: It takes a vertical force of F= 75,000 lb to separate the two parts at A and C in (Figure 1). Figure…
Q: A student walks to the right, 25 meters along the hallway in15 seconds. The student turns around and…
Q: Find an equation of the tangent plane to the given surface at the specified point. z = 6(x − 1)2 +…
Q: In the year 2032, Daniella Portelada is a leading traveling nurse.  Daniella is interested in…
Q: 4) Determine the slope and the displacement at C. El is constant. Use the moment-area theorems.
Q: Let f(x,y)=3x³y-2y²-3x²-8y+2 i. Find the stationary points of f ii. For each stationary point P…
Q: there is a significant relationship between cognitive ability and social status, at least for birds.…