Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

This paper will propose a new version of to treat dynamics of [1] and other similar notions such as and by revising the DMPL of modal subordination [2] by adding a kind of counterpart relation. The revised dynamic semantics of DMPL is much simpler than Edelberg’s semantics [3] of intentional identity and can treat and which have not been treated by most semantics of intentional identity as well as Edelberg’s semantics.

In this paper, I propose a new version of probabilistic dynamic epistemic logic (GIPDEL) that is based on general imaging, and sketch the proof of soundness and completeness of this logic. The Monty Hall dilemma is a common topic in probabilistic dynamic epistemic logic. Using conditionalisation-based probabilistic dynamic epistemic logic (CPDEL), Kooi ([7]) supported the answer that I should switch my choice. However, it is acknowledged that this answer is counterintuitive. Using GIPDEL, I can support the answer that I do not have to switch my choice. Intuition would suggest this answer. Moreover, GIPDEL can give a plausible answer to a modified version of the Monty Hall dilemma to which CPDEL gives an extremely counterintuitive answer.

In this paper, an eliminative command logic ECL introduced in Yamada [21] will be slightly refined into ECLII by allowing command terms and deontic operators to be indexed by a Cartesian Product of a given finite set of agents and a given finite set of command issuing authorities. Complete axiomatization and interesting validities will be presented, and a concrete example of a situation in which conflicting commands are given to the same agent by different authorities will be discussed extensively.

Certain types of wh-phrases (e.g. , ) cannot be extracted from the complement clause of a factive predicate, nor can they occur within it (the factive island effect). This paper argues that the factive island effect is a pragmatic phenomenon, which follows from two independent factors: (i) the speaker’s expectation about possible answers of wh-interrogatives, and (ii) presuppositions induced by factive predicates. The proposed account illustrates a special kind of pragmatic infelicity (which I term “pragmatic anomaly”), which can be opposed to “contingent” pragmatic infelicity such as presupposition failure, violation of Gricean maxims, etc.

This paper proposes an account for the indefiniteness effect discussed in [1]. We shall argue that the effect arises from (a) the tendency of indefinites in certain interrogative constructions to take wide scope over WH-terms, resulting in ‘quantifying into’ questions, and (b) the pragmatic impropiety of interrogatives with wide scope taking indefinites to form speech acts for requesting answers. Our proposal is formally implemented using the interpretation of quantifying into questions as choice readings provided by [2] and [3].

We present a formalism of metaphor that is based on a newly developed semantic interpretation of concept in the line of Montague’s type theory, and exposit the role that metaphoric expressions play in linking two concepts together. We argue that metaphors have to be understood intensionally. We show that a metaphoric expression states the inclusion relation between the intensions of two concepts in a certain context. A formal intensional semantics that defines the truth condition of metaphor is established. This semantics accounts for a number of important features of metaphors such as intensionality, nonreversibility, partial systematicity and context-sensitivity.

It has been argued that in some languages, attitude verbs shift the reference of indexicals in the embedded clauses [1,2,3]. I argue that not only overt attitude predicates but also implicit emotive modality is a context-shifting operator that changes the context parameters. I base my argument on the following three mono-clausal constructions: (i) fake past (ii) fake present, and (iii) discourse initial sentence focus . Surprise licenses non-past interpretation of the past tense [4] with negative presupposition. Alternation between past and present directs readers to re-experience narratives [5]. A speaker’s emotion or sentiment licenses wide-scope without explicit antecedents. Finally, covert modal is grammatically represented as a determiner-like element that takes negative presupposition in the restrictor and overt predicate in the nuclear scope [6,7,8,9].

This paper aims to show how general pragmatic pressures, interacting with the context of utterance, can produce specific conversational implicatures — as well as the lack thereof in nonsupporting environments. Inspired by the work of Merin (1997), Blutner (1998), van Rooy (2003a), Benz et al. (2005), and others, I use probabilities to represent speakers’ belief states and the content of their utterances. These values determine an utterance’s and I adapt Roberts’ (1996) view of the question under discussion to define a of utterances. These values come together in a definition of . This definition licenses certain inferences — relevance implicatures relating to the question under discussion (section 4.1) and a variety of quantity implicatures (sections 4.2–4.3).

This paper shows that the use of the Japanese exhaustive particle ‘only’ in a Contrastive-marked sentence results in exhaustification over potential literal acts of assertion in the sense of [1], rather than exhaustification over propositions. Also, the data supports the idea that the exceptive meaning denoted by contributes to an expressive level of meaning.

Unembedded ‘negative’ quantifiers, which are isolated in conversation initial position, provide evidence for the debate between the direct interpretation analysis of an isolated quantifier and the ellipsis analysis. In fact, unembedding of a Greek ‘negative’ quantifier supports the former, while unembedding of a Russian ‘negative’ quantifier supports the latter.