This thesis consists of four essays and an introduction dedicated to two main topics: indexicality and presupposition. The first essay is concerned with an alleged problem for the standard treatment of indexicals on which their linguistic meanings are functions from context to content (so-called characters). Since most indexicals have their content settled, on an occasion of use, by the speaker’s intentions, some authors have argued that this standard picture is inadequate. By demonstrating that intentions can be seen as a parameter of the kind of context that characters operate on, these arguments are rejected. In addition, it is argued that a more recent, variable-based framework is naturally interpreted as an intention-sensitive semantics. The second essay is devoted to the phenomenon of descriptive uses of indexicals on which such an expression seems to contribute, not its standard reference as determined by its character, but a property to the interpretation. An argument that singular readings of the cases in question are incoherent is shown to be incorrect, and an approach to descriptive readings is developed on which they arise from e-type uses akin to other well known cases. Further, descriptive readings of the relevant kind are seen to arise only in the presence of adverbs of quantification, and all sentences in which such an adverb takes scope over an indexical are claimed to be ambiguous between a referential and an e-type (descriptive) reading. The third essay discusses a version of the variable analysis of pronouns on which their descriptive meanings are relegated to the so-called phi-features – person, gender and number. In turn, the phi-features are here seen as triggering semantic presuppositions that place constraints on the definedness of pronouns, and ultimately of sentences in which they appear. It is argued that the descriptive information contributed by the phi-features diverges radically from presuppositional information of both semantic and pragmatic varieties on several dimensions of comparison, and instead the main role of the phi-features is seen to be that of guiding hearers’ attempts to ascertain the speaker’s intentions. The fourth essay addresses an issue concerning the treatment of presuppositions in dynamic semantics. Representing a semantic treatment of pragmatic presuppositions, the dynamic framework is shown to incorrectly regard conversational infelicity as sufficient for semantic undefinedness, given the standard way of defining truth in terms of context change. Further, it is shown that a proposal for a solution fail to make correct predictions for epistemic modals. A novel framework is developed on which context change potentials act on contexts that have more structure than the contexts usually countenanced by dynamic semantics, and it is shown that this framework derives truth from context change while making correct predictions for both presuppositions and modals.

The thesis investigates the formal semantics of temporal indexical expressions in English. Examples of such expressions include now, tomorrow and last year. In the past, research has concentrated on instances of such expressions which have two major properties. These indexicals are sensitive to extralinguistic context, and while they do possess descriptive meaning, that meaning does not appear within the propositions which correspond to utterances of the sentences which contain the indexicals. The thesis argues that this line of research has neglected a significant body of natural language evidence in which indexicals display rather different behaviour. We term indexicals from the first group unbound, and indexicals from the second group bound. Given these two domains of indexical evidence, the thesis sets out to achieve three primary aims. The first aim is to provide a formal semantic representation of both bound and unbound indexicals which systematically relates them, while distinguishing them from non-indexical expressions. To establish this aim, we informally investigate the relationship between the two types of indexical, and propose a unifying generalisation. This generalisation is then embedded within an existing but novel semantic system, due to Richards, called IQ. IQ is an interval-based semantics for tenses and temporal quantifiers in English which makes use of double-indexing. IQ must be modified so as to properly accommodate indexicals. With a new representation in hand, we demonstrate that the thesis can adequately treat both types of indexical occurrence. The second aim of the thesis is to assess the effects of the incorporation of the two types of indexical on the semantic entities of IQ. The propositions of IQ already include two major types: value free and value specific. Using the new representation of indexicals, the thesis shows that there are further varieties of the value free proposition. These propositions are then compared with Kaplan's contents, Frege's thoughts and Russell's propositions. The final aim is to establish a rigorous formulation of a fragment of the version of IQ derived in the thesis. Given this formulation, it is possible to assess its position relative to a landmark in the logic of indexicals. Using mathematical techniques, the thesis proves that the tense operators and indexical operators of the final version of IQ have particular properties which distinguish them from those in other indexical logics also based on double-indexing.

I present and defend an account of indexicals that treats indexicals as presuppositional expressions. I argue that the distinction between presupposed and asserted content can replace the more restrictive distinction between character and content that is characteristic of Kaplanian, two-dimensional views. My account, "Presuppositional Indexicals" (PI), is simpler than a two-dimensional account because it does not posit a special layer of meaning for indexicals that cannot interact with truth-conditional content. PI also has broader scope than two-dimensional theories. It opens the door to a general theory of definite noun phrases according to which all definites have two components to their meaning: an asserted component, which contributes new information to a discourse, and a presuppositional component, which determines where asserted information will be attached in a discourse. PI does not stipulate rigidity or referentiality for indexicals as many other theories do. Indexicals do receive a special semantic treatment in PI, but their special semantics are captured entirely in terms of a strategy that indexicals exhibit for the resolution of their presuppositions. / text

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2000. Graduate Programme in French Studies. / Typescript. Title on thesis acceptance page: La deicticite de l'adjectif démonstratif : cadrage de la problèmatique. Includes bibliographical references (leaves109-113). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pMQ56196

I investigate the relationship among the notions of meaning, content, and what is said. It is widely held that indexicals – words like 'this', 'I', or 'today' – contribute their reference, and nothing but their reference, to the semantic content, and thereby undermine any tentative identification of semantic content with lexical meaning. Against the mainstream view, I argue that semantic content is lexical meaning, for indexical and non-indexical expressions alike. In Chapter 1, I lay down this proposal in all due detail, explaining how to think of the semantic content of sentences containing indexicals, and articulating the relationship between content, truth, and reference. In Chapter 2, I present a number of problems for the existing accounts of what is said, and then show that if we think of semantic content along the lines of my proposal, we may account for the problematic cases while identifying the asserted content (or what is said) with semantic content. In Chapter 3, I show how my account extends, on the one hand, to definite descriptions and proper names, and, on the other, to epistemic modals and predicates of taste.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Delaware, 2009. / Principal faculty advisor: Ann E. Gibson, Dept. of Art History. Includes bibliographical references.

Orientador: Edson Françozo / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-14T10:07:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Basso_RenatoMiguel.pdf: 1338405 bytes, checksum: 9163a03b6f57e64b88663107067bd72f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009 / Resumo: Nesta tese, avaliamos a afirmação de Davidson (1967) de que a anáfora de eventos e a anáfora de objetos ordinários lançam mão dos mesmos recursos linguísticos. Davidson usa a evidência da anáfora não apenas para postular eventos na ontologia, mas também como um argumento a favor de considerá-los como objetos ordinários (como particulares). No entanto, ao investigarmos os mecanismos linguísticos mobilizados na anáfora de eventos, encontramos grandes diferenças em comparação com o que encontramos na anáfora de objetos (em geral, linguisticamente veiculados através de nomes ou de descrições), levando-nos a colocar a afirmação de Davidson sob suspeita. Na primeira parte da tese, apresentamos e defendemos uma versão da teoria de eventos postulada por Davidson que os trata como objetos ordinários (particulares). Analisamos também as teorias que tomam eventos como propriedades de momentos de tempo e teorias que tomam eventos como entidades proposicionais. Cada uma dessas teorias tem seus méritos e problemas, mas o intuito é nos mantermos o mais próximo à formulação de Davidson para avaliarmos suas afirmações quanto à anáfora de eventos. Ainda na primeira parte, investigamos as relações entre dêixis e anáfora, um tema que envolve quaisquer discussões sobre termos usados anaforicamente. Na segunda parte da tese, nosso olhar volta-se para a anáfora de eventos cujos antecedentes são expressões sentenciais (i.e., que não são DPs). Diante de tais antecedentes, os termos anafóricos preferenciais são demonstrativos, e investigamos o pronome demonstrativo 'isso' e descrições demonstrativas da forma 'esse/essa/aquele/aquela N'. Apresentamos o estado-da-arte dos estudos sobre demonstrativos, salientando que eles podem ser tratados como termos referenciais ou como termos quantificacionais. Dado que o debate é bastante complexo e ainda incipiente, apresentamos duas análises de retomadas de eventos com demonstrativos: uma que os toma como termos referenciais, e outra que os toma como termos quantificacionais. Contudo, apesar dessa diferença nas análises, o resultado a que chegamos é semelhante, e mostra que os mecanismos por trás da anáfora de eventos são mais próximos da anáfora de entidades proposicionais do que da anáfora de objetos ordinários, contrariando a tese davidsoniana. Na terceira parte, analisamos a retomada de eventos em que o antecedente é uma estrutura nominal (i.e., DPs) e cujos termos anafóricos preferenciais são descrições definidas e demonstrativas. Nesta parte, investigamos a semântica das nominalizações e sua relação com eventos veiculados por verbos de ação flexionados. Assumimos, como é comum na literatura sobre eventos, que uma sentença com verbo de ação flexionado e sua contraparte com nominalização têm a mesma forma lógica. Mostramos que tal assunção leva a resultados indesejados quando consideramos a anáfora de eventos, que se situam, também nessa configuração, mais próxima da anáfora de entidades proposicionais. Na conclusão, apontamos que adotar a noção de evento como um objeto a partir do fenômeno da anáfora não se sustenta, já que a anáfora de eventos se assemelha em muito à anáfora de entidades abstratas, como as proposições, e não à anáfora de objetos. Tal conclusão tem consequências para as teorias semânticas contemporâneas que ingenuamente equiparam eventos a objetos. / Abstract: In this thesis, we evaluated Davidson's (1967) statement according to which event anaphora and (ordinary) object anaphora use the same linguistic resources. Davidson uses the evidence of anaphora not only to postulate events in the ontology but also as an argument for considering them as ordinary objects (as individuals). However, as we investigate the linguistic mechanisms mobilized in event anaphora and the ones mobilized in (ordinary) object anaphora we found significant differences, a conclusion which compromises Davidson's assumptions about the metaphysics of events. In the first part of this thesis, we present and defend a version of the theory of events postulated by Davidson that treats them as individuals in the same way as other objects. We look briefly at other theories that take events as properties of moments of time and theories that take events as propositional entities. Each of these theories has their merits and problems, but our intention is to follow Davidson's formulation closely, in order to evaluate his claims about anaphora event. We investigate the differences between deixis and anaphora, a theme that involves any discussion of the terms used in anaphora. In the second part, our attention goes to event anaphora when the antecedents are sentential expressions (i.e., that are not DPs). With this kind of antecedent, the preferred anaphoric terms are demonstratives, and we investigate the demonstrative pronoun 'isso' and demonstrative descriptions ('esse / essa / aquele / aquela N'). We present the state-of-the art of the studies of demonstrative, noting that they can be treated as referring or as quantificational expressions. Since the debate is very complex and still in its beginning, we present two analysis of event anaphora with sentential antecedents: one that takes the anaphoric terms as referential, and one that takes them as quantificational. However, despite this difference in the analysis, the result we reached is similar, and it shows that the mechanisms behind the anaphora of events are closer to the anaphora of propositional entities than to the anaphora of ordinary objects, against the Davidsonian thesis. In the third part, we analyze the anaphora of events in which the antecedent is a nominal structure (i.e., DPs); with this kind of antecedent the preferred anaphoric terms are definite and demonstrative descriptions. We also investigate the semantics of nominalizations and their relationship to events conveyed by inflected action verbs. We assume, as is common practice in the literature on events, that sentences with an inflected action verb and their nominalized counterparts have the same logical form. We show that this assumption leads to undesired results when we consider event anaphora. In the conclusion, we point out that adopting the concept of event as an object can not be sustained from the point of view of anaphoric phenomenona, since event anaphora resembles the anaphora of abstract entities such as propositions, and not object anaphora. This conclusion has implications for contemporary semantic theories which naively equate events and objects. / Universidade Estadual de Campi / Linguistica / Doutor em Linguística

The extensions of vague predicates like ‘is bald’, ‘is tall’, and ‘is a heap’ apparently lack sharp boundaries, and this makes such predicates susceptible to soritical reasoning, i.e. reasoning that leads to some version of the notorious sorites paradox. This essay is concerned with a certain kind of theory of vagueness, according to which the symptoms and puzzles of vagueness should be accounted for in terms of a particular species of context sensitivity exhibited by vague expressions. The basic idea is that the extensions of vague predicates vary with certain contextual factors, and that this fact can explain why they appear to lack sharp boundaries. This kind of view is referred to as contextualism about vagueness. A detailed characterisation of contextualism about vagueness is given in chapter two and three. In chapter two, a generic version of contextualism about vagueness is developed, and some alternative forms of context sensitivity are introduced. In chapter three, the specific contextual factors appealed to by different contextualists are discussed. In chapter four, different contextualist diagnoses of the sorites paradox are considered, and found to be problematic in various ways. It is argued that contrary to what some of its proponents have claimed, contextualism about vagueness is not superior to other comparable theories of vagueness when it comes to explaining the appeal of soritical reasoning. In chapter five, a certain version of the sorites paradox, known as the forced march sorites, is discussed. It is argued that “data” about how speakers would behave in the forced march cannot lend any firm support to contextualism about vagueness. In chapter six, some problems concerning the instability of the contextual factors are considered. One problem is that contextualist diagnoses of the sorites which locate a fallacy of equivocation in the reasoning seem to render non-soritical reasoning fallacious as well. A model for treating this problem is suggested, but on closer consideration, it turns out to be problematic. Moreover, this model is of no help in solving the more general problem that even if classical logic remains valid for vague language on some contextualist views, the instability of the extensions of vague predicates makes it difficult to know when a certain piece of reasoning instantiates a valid argument form. Other difficulties arise with respect to speech reports and belief contents. Chapter seven concludes with a summary and some methodological remarks.