Abstract
This paper offers an explanation of the fact that sentences of the form (1) ‘X may A or B’ may be construed as implying (2) ‘X may A and X may B’, especially if they are used to grant permission. It is suggested that the effect arises because disjunctions are conjunctive lists of epistemic possibilities. Consequently, if the modal may is itself epistemic, (1) comes out as equivalent to (2), due to general laws of epistemic logic. On the other hand, on a deontic reading of may, (2) is only implied under exceptional circumstances – which usually obtain when (1) is used performatively.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Bittner, Maria: 2000, ‘Coarse-Graining. A Topic-Sensitive Phenomenon’, manuscript, Rutgers University.
Cresswell, Maxwell J.: 1973, Logics and Languages, Methuen, London.
Gamut, L. T. F.: 1991, Logic, Language, and Meaning, Vol. 1: Introduction to Logic, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Gazdar, Gerald: 1979, Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York.
Grice, Paul: 1989, Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Martin Stokhof: 1984, Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers, Academisch Proefschrift, University of Amsterdam.
Jacobs, Joachim: 1988, ‘Fokus-Hintergrund-Gliederung und Grammatik’, in H. Altmann (ed.), Intonationsforschungen, pp. 89–134, Niemeyer, Tübingen.
Kamp, Hans: 1973, ‘Free Choice Permission’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, N.S. 74, 57–74.
Kamp, Hans: 1978, ‘Semantics versus Pragmatics’, in F. Guenthner and S. J. Schmidt (eds.), Formal Semantics and Pragmatics for Natural Languages, pp. 255–287. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Kamp, Hans and Uwe, Reyle: 1993, From Discourse to Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Kaplan, David: 1969, ‘Quantifying In’, in D. Davidson and J. Hintikka (eds.), Words and Objections: Essays on the Work of W. V. Quine, pp. 178–214. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Kaplan, David: 1989, ‘Demonstratives. An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals’, in J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan. pp. 481–566. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kratzer, Angelika: 1989, ‘An Investigation into the Lumps of Thought’, Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 607–653.
Kratzer, Angelika: 1991, ‘Modality’, in A. V. Stechow and D. Wunderlich (eds.), Semantics. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, pp. 639–650. De Gruyter, Berlin.
Kratzer, Angelika: 1997, ‘German Impersonal Pronouns and Logophoricity’, opening lecture of the 2nd Meeting of the Gesellschaft für Semantik, Berlin 1997.
Lewis, David: 1979, ‘Attitudes de dicto and de se’, Philosophical Review 8, 513–543.
Merin, Arthur: 1992, ‘Permission Sentences Stand in the Way of Boolean and Other Lattice-Theoretic Semantics’, Journal of Semantics 9, 95–162.
Pafel, Jürgen: 1999, ‘Interrogative Quantifiers within Scope’, Linguistics and Philosophy 22, 255–310.
Partee, Barbara: 1989, ‘Binding Implicit Variables in Quantified Contexts’, in C. Wiltshire et al. (eds.), CLS 25. Part 1: The General Session, pp. 342–365. The Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.
Pierrhumbert, Janet and Mary Beckman: 1988, Japanese Tone Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Roberts, Craige: 1989, ‘Modal Subordination and Pronominal Anaphora in Discourse’, Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 689–721.
Rooth, Mats: 1985, Association with Focus, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
van Rooy, Robert: 1997, Attitudes and Changing Contexts, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Stuttgart.
Simons, Mandy: 1997, ‘Disjunction and Anaphora’, in T. Galloway and J. Spence (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 6, pp. 245–260, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Stalnaker, Robert: 1975, ‘Indicative Conditionals’, Philosophia 5, 269–286.
von Stechow, Arnim: 1991, ‘Focussing and Backgrounding Operators’, in W. Abraham (ed.), Discourse Particles, pp. 37–84, Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
von Stechow, Arnim and Thomas E. Zimmermann: 1984, ‘Term Answers and Contextual Change’, Linguistics 22, 3–40.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zimmermann, T.E. Free Choice Disjunction and Epistemic Possibility. Natural Language Semantics 8, 255–290 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011255819284
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011255819284