×

On the nature of presupposition: a normative speech act account. (English) Zbl 1475.03027

Summary: In this paper I provide a new account of linguistic presuppositions, on which they are ancillary speech acts defined by constitutive norms. After providing an initial intuitive characterization of the phenomenon, I present a normative speech act account of presupposition in parallel with Williamson’s analogous account of assertion. I explain how it deals well with the problem of informative presuppositions, and how it relates to accounts for the Triggering and Projection Problems for presuppositions. I conclude with a brief discussion of the consequences of the proposal for the adequacy of Williamson’s account of assertion.

MSC:

03A05 Philosophical and critical aspects of logic and foundations
03B65 Logic of natural languages

References:

[1] Abbott, B., Presuppositions and common ground, Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, 523-538 (2008) · doi:10.1007/s10988-008-9048-8
[2] Abbott, B., An information packaging approach to presuppositions and conventional implicatures, Topoi (2015) · doi:10.1007/s11245-014-9285-0
[3] Abrusán, M., Predicting the presuppositions of soft triggers, Linguistics and Philosophy, 34, 491-535 (2011) · doi:10.1007/s10988-012-9108-y
[4] Abrusán, M., Presupposition cancellation: Explaining the ‘soft-hard’ trigger distinction, Natural Language Semantics, 24, 165-202 (2016) · doi:10.1007/s11050-016-9122-7
[5] Alston, WP, Illocutionary acts and sentence meaning (2000), Ithaca: Cornell UP, Ithaca
[6] Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Second edition issued as an Oxford UP paperback, 1989, to which page references are made.)
[7] Bach, K., The myth of conventional implicatures, Linguistics and Philosophy, 22, 327-366 (1999) · doi:10.1023/A:1005466020243
[8] Bach, K., Applying pragmatics to epistemology, Philosophical Studies, 18, 68-88 (2008)
[9] Bach, K.; Harnish, RM, Linguistic communication and speech acts (1979), Cambridge: MIT Press, Cambridge
[10] Beaver, D., Presupposition and assertion in dynamic semantics (2001), Stanford: CSLI, Stanford
[11] Beaver, D. & Geurts, B. (2011). Presupposition. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.) The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/presupposition/.
[12] Boër, SE; Lycan, W., The myth of semantic presupposition (1976), Bloomington: Indiana Linguistics Club, Bloomington
[13] Chierchia, G.; McConnell-Ginet, S., Meaning and grammar (1990), Cambridge: MIT Press, Cambridge
[14] Cummins, C.; Amaral, P.; Katsos, N., Experimental investigation of the typology of presupposition triggers, Humana Mente, 23, 1-15 (2012)
[15] Davis, WA, Speaker meaning, Linguistics and Philosophy, 15, 223-253 (1992) · doi:10.1007/BF00627678
[16] DeRose, K., Assertion, knowledge and context, Philosophical Review, 111, 167-203 (2002) · doi:10.1215/00318108-111-2-167
[17] Donnellan, K., Reference and definite descriptions, Philosophical Review, 75, 281-304 (1966) · doi:10.2307/2183143
[18] García-Carpintero, M., A presuppositional account of reference-fixing, Journal of Philosophy xcvii, 3, 109-147 (2000) · doi:10.2307/2678500
[19] García-Carpintero, M.; Bianchi, C., Assertion and the semantics of force-markers, The semantics/pragmatics distinction, CSLI lecture notes, 133-166 (2004), Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
[20] García-Carpintero, M., Accommodating presuppositions, Topoi, 35, 1, 37-44 (2016) · doi:10.1007/s11245-014-9264-5
[21] García-Carpintero, M., Indirect assertions, Polish Journal of Philosophy, X, 1, 13-49 (2016) · doi:10.5840/pjphil20161012
[22] García-Carpintero, M. (2017a). Pejoratives, contexts and presuppositions. In P. Brézillon, R. Turner, C. Penco (eds.) Modeling and using context. CONTEXT 2017, LNAI 10257. Cham: Springer.
[23] García-Carpintero, M., The mill-frege theory of proper names, Mind (2017) · doi:10.1093/mind/fzx010
[24] García-Carpintero, M. (forthcoming). Tell me what you know. Oxford: Oxford UP.
[25] García-Carpintero, M. (ms) Speech act indirection.
[26] Gauker, C., Against accommodation, Philosophical perspectives, 22, 171-205 (2008) · Zbl 1230.03020 · doi:10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00145.x
[27] Geurts, B., Presuppositions and Pronouns (1999), Amsterdam: Elsevier, Amsterdam
[28] Goldstein, L., Brevity (2013), Oxford: Oxford University Press, Oxford
[29] Green, M., Self-expression (2007), Oxford: Oxford University Press, Oxford
[30] Hawthorne, J., Knowledge and lotteries (2004), Oxford: Oxford U. P, Oxford
[31] Hawthorne, J.; Manley, D., The Reference Book (2012), Oxford: Oxford U. P, Oxford
[32] Heim, I., On the projection problem for presuppositions, Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Linguistics, 2, 114-126 (1983)
[33] Hinchman, E., Assertion, sincerity, and knowledge, Noûs, 47, 613-646 (2013) · doi:10.1111/nous.12045
[34] Hindriks, F., The status of the knowledge account of assertion, Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 393-406 (2007) · doi:10.1007/s10988-007-9019-5
[35] Kadmon, N., Formal pragmatics (2001), Oxford: Blackwell, Oxford
[36] Karttunen, L. (1974). Presuppositions and linguistic contexts. In Theoretical linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 181-194). Also in S. Davis (Ed.), Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford UP, pp. 406-416, to which I refer.
[37] Lackey, J., Norms of assertion, Noûs, 41, 4, 594-626 (2007) · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0068.2007.00664.x
[38] Langton, R.; West, C., Scorekeeping in a Pornographic Game, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 77, 3, 303-319 (1999) · doi:10.1080/00048409912349061
[39] Levinson, S., Pragmatics (1983), Cambridge: Cambridge UP, Cambridge
[40] Lewis, D., Scorekeeping in a language game, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8, 339-359 (1979) · doi:10.1007/BF00258436
[41] Pelling, C., Assertion and the provision of knowledge, The Philosophical Quarterly, 63, 293-312 (2013) · doi:10.1111/1467-9213.12013
[42] Potts, C.; Ramchand, G.; Reiss, Ch, Conventional implicature: A distinguished class of meanings, Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, 475-501 (2007), Oxford: Oxford UP, Oxford
[43] Rawls, J., Two concepts of rules, The Philosophical Review, 64, 3-32 (1955) · doi:10.2307/2182230
[44] Reed, B., A defense of stable invariantism, Noûs, 44, 224-244 (2010) · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00738.x
[45] Roberts, C.; Horn, LR; Ward, G., Context in dynamic interpretation, The handbook of pragmatics, 197-220 (2004), Oxford: Blackwell, Oxford
[46] Schlenker, P., Local contexts, Semantics & Pragmatics, 2, 1-78 (2009) · doi:10.3765/sp.2.3
[47] Searle, J., Speech acts (1969), Cambridge: Cambridge UP, Cambridge
[48] Shanon, B., On the two kinds of presuppositions in natural language, Foundations of Language, 14, 247-249 (1976)
[49] Simion, M., Assertion: Knowledge is enough, Synthese, 193, 3041-3056 (2016) · doi:10.1007/s11229-015-0914-y
[50] Simons, M., Presupposition and accommodation: Understanding the stalnakerian picture, Philosophical Studies, 112, 251-278 (2003) · doi:10.1023/A:1023004203043
[51] Simons, M. (2005). Presuppositions and relevance. In Z. Szabo (Ed.) Semantics vs. pragmatics (pp. 329-355). Oxford: Oxford UP.
[52] Simons, M. (2006). Presupposition without common ground. http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/faculty-simons.php. Accessed on August 6, 2010.
[53] Simons, M.; Sbisà, M.; Turner, K., Presupposing, Pragmatics of speech actions, HoP 2, 143-172 (2013), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin
[54] Simons, M.; Beaver, D.; Roberts, C.; Tonhauser, J., The best questions: Explaining the projection behavior of factives, Discourse Processes, 54, 3, 187-206 (2017) · doi:10.1080/0163853X.2016.1150660
[55] Simons, M.; Tonhauser, J.; Beaver, D.; Roberts, C., What projects and why, Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), 22, 309-327 (2011)
[56] Spenader, J., Factive presuppositions, accommodation and information structure, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12, 351-368 (2003) · Zbl 1047.91581 · doi:10.1023/A:1024191513816
[57] Stalnaker, R., Presuppositions, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 447-457 (1973) · doi:10.1007/BF00262951
[58] Stalnaker, R. (1974). Pragmatic presuppositions. In M. K. Munitz & P. K. Unger (Eds.) Semantics and philosophy. New York: New York UP. Also in R. Stalnaker, Context and content. Oxford: Oxford UP. 1999, pp. 47-62, to which I refer.
[59] Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. In P. Cole (Ed.) Syntax and semantics (Vol. 9, pp. 315-332). New York: Academic Press. Also in R. Stalnaker, Context and content. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999, pp. 78-95, to which I refer.
[60] Stalnaker, R. (1998). On the representation of context. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 7, 3-19. Also in R. Stalnaker, Context and content. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999, pp. 96-113, to which I refer.
[61] Stalnaker, R., Common ground, Linguistics and Philosophy, 25, 701-721 (2002) · doi:10.1023/A:1020867916902
[62] Stalnaker, R., Context (2014), Oxford: OUP, Oxford
[63] Tonhauser, J.; Beaver, D.; Roberts, C.; Simons, M., Towards a taxonomy of projective content, Language, 89, 66-109 (2013) · doi:10.1353/lan.2013.0001
[64] Turri, J., Prompting challenges, Analysis, 70, 3, 456-462 (2010) · doi:10.1093/analys/anq027
[65] Unger, P., Ignorance (1975), Oxford: Oxford U.P, Oxford
[66] Vlach, F., Speaker’s meaning, Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 359-391 (1981) · doi:10.1007/BF00304401
[67] von Fintel, K.; Reimer, M.; Bezuidenhout, A., Would you believe it? The king of France is back! (presuppositions and truth-value intuitions), Descriptions and beyond, 315-341 (2004), Oxford: Oxford UP, Oxford
[68] von Fintel, K., What is presupposition accommodation, again?, Philosophical Perspectives, 22, 137-170 (2008) · Zbl 1230.03041 · doi:10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00144.x
[69] von Fintel, K.; Matthewson, L., Universals in semantics, The Linguistic Review, 25, 139-201 (2008)
[70] Weiner, M., Must we know what we say?, Philosophical Review, 114, 227-251 (2005) · doi:10.1215/00318108-114-2-227
[71] Williamson, T. (1996/2000). Knowing and Asserting. Philosophical Review 105, pp. 489-523; included with some revisions as chapter 11 of his Knowledge and its limits. New York: Oxford UP, 2000, from which I quote.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.